The Devil's Horn: The Orchestral Aversion to the Saxophone
*cue Law & Order: Special Victims Unit Theme Song*
Narrator: In the concert hall environment, instrument-based ostracization is considered especially heinous. In conservatory, the dedicated classical saxophonists who practice their viciously limited repertoire ad nauseam remain estranged from the members of an elite squad known as the orchestra. This is their story.
I tease; that’s a bit far fetched. However, the following conversation is a based on many true and regular conversations I had with a myriad of curious relatives, friends, teachers, counselors, and strangers when I was applying to music school just four years ago:
“You’re applying to music school! How nice. What are you going for?”
“Saxophone"
“Oh, jazz! I love jazz. That’s wonderful.”
“Actually, I’ll be studying classical saxophone.”
“Classical saxophone? I didn’t know that existed.”
Narrator: In the concert hall environment, instrument-based ostracization is considered especially heinous. In conservatory, the dedicated classical saxophonists who practice their viciously limited repertoire ad nauseam remain estranged from the members of an elite squad known as the orchestra. This is their story.
I tease; that’s a bit far fetched. However, the following conversation is a based on many true and regular conversations I had with a myriad of curious relatives, friends, teachers, counselors, and strangers when I was applying to music school just four years ago:
“You’re applying to music school! How nice. What are you going for?”
“Saxophone"
“Oh, jazz! I love jazz. That’s wonderful.”
“Actually, I’ll be studying classical saxophone.”
“Classical saxophone? I didn’t know that existed.”
Apparently, neither do composers or conductors. Or professional orchestras or textbooks (I’m looking at you, Richard Taruskin. Not a single mention? Not even in the jazz chapters? The appendices? The glossary? I’m shocked; how can a history textbook exist that omits such important elements of the history of which it speaks?). And because of this, neither does the general public. As Mathew C. Ferraro, a fellow classical saxophonist, explains, the saxophone is in an “unusual class of instrument, both worthy of being studied at the highest levels but lacking particular qualities that render it unfit for the orchestra.” Sometimes explaining classical saxophone feels like the moment in Dr. Seuss’s “Horton Hears a Who” where the Whos cry out in fear, “We are here!”
Yes, we are here, but can you hear us? Our voices projected through curved brass? No, because we have yet to find a true place - or home, rather - in the orchestra. Many composers of orchestral music not only ignored the saxophone but actually developed an aversion to the instrument, despite the fact that it was created at a time when the orchestra was expanding at its most rapid pace. This aversion developed into a compositional practice that seems to remain present today. But why? Let’s rewind about two hundred years...
Yes, we are here, but can you hear us? Our voices projected through curved brass? No, because we have yet to find a true place - or home, rather - in the orchestra. Many composers of orchestral music not only ignored the saxophone but actually developed an aversion to the instrument, despite the fact that it was created at a time when the orchestra was expanding at its most rapid pace. This aversion developed into a compositional practice that seems to remain present today. But why? Let’s rewind about two hundred years...
Prior to 1650, there exists only history of instruments very distantly and tangentially related to the saxophone because the saxophone and its closely related precursors, the ophicleide and the clarinet, were invented in the 1800s.
In the 1800s, Adolphe Sax, an impressively talented Belgian instrument maker, aspired to create an instrument that combined the power of a brass instrument with the facility of a stringed instrument and the nuances of a woodwind. In 1841, Sax began working on his first experimental model, a ophicleide-like brass instrument called the bass horn. The invention was not well received in his native Brussels. In Paris, however, he received much praise and recognition for his work from Hector Berlioz: “the saxophone...is the most beautiful low voice known to this day.” In 1846, Sax acquired two patents for his designs: one set of saxophones intended for orchestral purposes and the other set intended for military bands, both sets which contained a range of voices, from subcontrabass to sopranino.
Sax’s goal of integrating his new instrument into the military bands was quickly achieved. In the 1800s, military bands were symbols of power, however, the French military band lacked strength and vigor. Sax believed that his instruments would be able to help transform the image of the French military bands. Initially skeptical, the French adopted his instruments and revelled in the results. The efficacy of his instruments impressed other regimental bands, who soon commissioned Sax’s talents and instruments. Through military bands, the saxophone eventually arrived in New Orleans, where it became a key component in the formation of early jazz.
However, Sax’s wish for the saxophone to become a key part of the orchestra has yet to be fulfilled, nearly two hundred years later. Today, there is no orchestra in the world that employs a full-time saxophonist. Why? The age old question remains unanswered. It seems a bit odd, considering there is a decent amount of older repertoire that includes classical saxophone. For example, famous composers that conservatory students are required to study, such as Rachmaninoff, Ravel, Bizet, Berg, Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Ibert, Britten, Debussy, Villa-Lobos, Penderecki, Milhaud, Glazunov, and Gershwin, are just a few of the composers who wrote music for the instrument. Yet somehow, it remains mildly ostracized by the orchestral tradition.
Musicologists might argue that the saxophone was not included in the orchestra because it was invented much later than many of the other orchestral instruments, such as violin, horn, and oboe. This argument is true, but only to an extent. One counterargument to the “late to the game” excuse is that the tuba and the saxophone were created around the same time in the 1800s, yet the tuba has been readily adopted by orchestral repertoire whereas the saxophone hasn’t, despite both instruments being invented for the same purpose: to fill out the bass frequencies in the orchestra. Adolphe Sax’s initial goal for inventing the saxophone, as well as improving upon the bass clarinet, was to improve the sound and blend of the low woodwinds, as he felt the bassoon and the ophicleide in particular lacked the qualities necessary to bridge the timbres of the brass and the woodwinds and produced disagreeable sounds. So what gives?
Sax’s inventions were successful - at first. He moved from Brussels to Paris in 1842, where he eventually opened the Adolphe Sax Musical Instrument Factory. There, he began to manufacture his instruments, including the saxophone, which he continued to rework and perfect. In 1847, Sax opened a 400-seat concert hall adjacent to his workshop, which according to Berlioz, met a long-existing need in Paris for a medium-size hall suitable for chamber concerts. He used this hall as a space to regularly perform on his instruments to display and promote their superiority.
In the 1800s, Adolphe Sax, an impressively talented Belgian instrument maker, aspired to create an instrument that combined the power of a brass instrument with the facility of a stringed instrument and the nuances of a woodwind. In 1841, Sax began working on his first experimental model, a ophicleide-like brass instrument called the bass horn. The invention was not well received in his native Brussels. In Paris, however, he received much praise and recognition for his work from Hector Berlioz: “the saxophone...is the most beautiful low voice known to this day.” In 1846, Sax acquired two patents for his designs: one set of saxophones intended for orchestral purposes and the other set intended for military bands, both sets which contained a range of voices, from subcontrabass to sopranino.
Sax’s goal of integrating his new instrument into the military bands was quickly achieved. In the 1800s, military bands were symbols of power, however, the French military band lacked strength and vigor. Sax believed that his instruments would be able to help transform the image of the French military bands. Initially skeptical, the French adopted his instruments and revelled in the results. The efficacy of his instruments impressed other regimental bands, who soon commissioned Sax’s talents and instruments. Through military bands, the saxophone eventually arrived in New Orleans, where it became a key component in the formation of early jazz.
However, Sax’s wish for the saxophone to become a key part of the orchestra has yet to be fulfilled, nearly two hundred years later. Today, there is no orchestra in the world that employs a full-time saxophonist. Why? The age old question remains unanswered. It seems a bit odd, considering there is a decent amount of older repertoire that includes classical saxophone. For example, famous composers that conservatory students are required to study, such as Rachmaninoff, Ravel, Bizet, Berg, Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Ibert, Britten, Debussy, Villa-Lobos, Penderecki, Milhaud, Glazunov, and Gershwin, are just a few of the composers who wrote music for the instrument. Yet somehow, it remains mildly ostracized by the orchestral tradition.
Musicologists might argue that the saxophone was not included in the orchestra because it was invented much later than many of the other orchestral instruments, such as violin, horn, and oboe. This argument is true, but only to an extent. One counterargument to the “late to the game” excuse is that the tuba and the saxophone were created around the same time in the 1800s, yet the tuba has been readily adopted by orchestral repertoire whereas the saxophone hasn’t, despite both instruments being invented for the same purpose: to fill out the bass frequencies in the orchestra. Adolphe Sax’s initial goal for inventing the saxophone, as well as improving upon the bass clarinet, was to improve the sound and blend of the low woodwinds, as he felt the bassoon and the ophicleide in particular lacked the qualities necessary to bridge the timbres of the brass and the woodwinds and produced disagreeable sounds. So what gives?
Sax’s inventions were successful - at first. He moved from Brussels to Paris in 1842, where he eventually opened the Adolphe Sax Musical Instrument Factory. There, he began to manufacture his instruments, including the saxophone, which he continued to rework and perfect. In 1847, Sax opened a 400-seat concert hall adjacent to his workshop, which according to Berlioz, met a long-existing need in Paris for a medium-size hall suitable for chamber concerts. He used this hall as a space to regularly perform on his instruments to display and promote their superiority.
Figure 1. “Nouvelle salle des concerts d’Adolphe Sax,” Printed in the Journal des débats (February 14, 1847): 2. Image from http://www.kimballtrombone.com/
Critics applauded the timbre, tone, and dynamic capabilities of the Sax’s invention. On August 27, 1843 Castil-Blaze wrote a long article on Sax, praising the virtues of the saxophone in particular: “The sonority and the timbre are admirable, it will be the “bull” of the orchestra and yet the huge vibrant full rich gratifying sounds of the saxophone can be softened almost to the final degree of pianissimo without effort, without constraint.”
Castil-Blaze praised the facility, the synthesis of brassy and elegant in one sound providing a brand new collection of voices and producing a new color: “The effect of three or four saxophones introduced into a symphonic orchestra would be charming. Their clinging and connected sounds and those sounds struck with vigor will be doubly valuable in supporting the mass of harmony.”
Despite positive reviews, only a handful of composers began to use the saxophone in their compositions. That which was even more curious, was that the proponents of the saxophone hesitated to include it in their symphonic works. Why? Political issues within the musical community, collusion between the instrument makers and musicians of Paris, and Sax’s own dynamic personality all combined to prevent the successful introduction of the saxophone into the orchestra.
Sax’s biggest pitfall was his rapid creation of enemies: “Brash, arrogant, and supremely self-confident, Sax was the embodiment of the fiery nineteenth-century Romantic.” His pridefulness and his constant desire to improve the mechanics of all wind instruments infuriated musicians and conductors alike, and his insolence alienated other instrument makers and the public during presentations of his instruments. He was so audacious that he suggested his instruments be used in the most prestigious French military bands despite not being from France. Ultimately, the French government was persuaded by Sax and the sounds of his inventions, which thus began a bitter enmity with the established instrument makers of Paris, and Sax’s competitors, who would begin to obstruct the introduction of his instruments, most notably the saxophone.
Sax also disregarded traditional manufacturing practices in France, given that he was also the inventor of his instruments. He effectively cut out small instrument shops that supplied parts to large manufacturing companies, since he could make his own parts. The French instrument makers were alienated by his practices and by his number of patents, which continued to increase steadily. On March 3, 1846 the first subpoena was issued on behalf of Parisian manufacturers including Raoux, Halary, Buffet, Gambaro, and Besson, who had organized to question the validity of Sax’s patents and protest the French government’s decision to use Sax’s instruments. Sax’s competitors also attempted to challenge the originality of the saxophone by purchasing several of Sax’s early instruments and having them secretly shipped to neighboring countries where the serial numbers were removed and re- engraved and then openly returned to Paris as instruments of foreign manufacture.
The constant stream of lawsuits succeeded in delaying the patent process and drained Sax of financial resources while also increasing public attention that served to tarnish Sax’s character. Sax’s rivals constantly questioned the validity of his patents and the moral fiber of the man himself. This created apprehension for composers and musicians toward Sax’s instruments, particularly the newly invented and often-disputed saxophone. Big yikes.
In addition to his political and personal conflicts, Sax had trouble integrating his invention into orchestras because of the instrument itself. Although it had been praised for its beautiful voice and great facility, the saxophone lacked precise intonation and few composers and listeners understood exactly how its sound could be incorporated into the orchestra. For this reason, it was either cast aside completely, or used solely to color an orchestral piece as a solo instrument in select portions of larger pieces. Since it was used only as a solo instrument on occasion, the orchestra had no need to hire a professionally trained saxophonist, as a clarinetist could easily learn to double the saxophone.
However, even solo parts are anything but prolific. Small solo parts are found in pieces like Bernstein’s Mass or Mussorgsky’s Pictures at an Exhibition, whereas some larger ones are found in Milhaud’s Creation du Monde and Prokofiev’s 1934 suite from Lieutenant Kije.
However, there were many pieces where the sound of the saxophone could have been applicable. For example, Stravinsky could have included the saxophone in the "Ragtime" section of his L'Histoire du Soldat, yet he chose to refrain from doing so. Why? Stravinsky’s answer was, found in a letter to composer and friend Ingolf Dahl, “I don’t know, to me a saxophone always sounds like a pink slimy worm.”
The sound was misunderstood, but even more misunderstood was the instrument’s image. The saxophone’s association with American popular music led the instrument away from classical music, eventually destroying any hope of establishing a place in the orchestra. For example, it’s inclusion in Vaudeville shows and other pop culture references and movies, in which its heated cries color passionate scenes, made the instrument seem lowbrow and excessively sensual. Supplementing this idea, composer Olivier Messiaen, among many other composers and conductors, claimed that the sound was representative of bad character; it elicited an air of sensuality and indulgence that did not have a place in classical music, which was considered high art. It’s sound called morality into question, hence earning its title as “The Devil’s Horn.” The decadent, wicked sound became a hallmark of “Western” music and ideals, the instrument was banned in Stalin’s USSR and the Empire of Japan and condemned as profane by the Vatican in Italy. Finally, it’s affiliation with jazz led to an association with racial and ethnic groups that were considered “degenerate” in Nazi Germany. Given that the orchestra represented, and today represents, high art and the saxophone represented corruption and uncultured society, the ostracization began and remained intact.
Castil-Blaze praised the facility, the synthesis of brassy and elegant in one sound providing a brand new collection of voices and producing a new color: “The effect of three or four saxophones introduced into a symphonic orchestra would be charming. Their clinging and connected sounds and those sounds struck with vigor will be doubly valuable in supporting the mass of harmony.”
Despite positive reviews, only a handful of composers began to use the saxophone in their compositions. That which was even more curious, was that the proponents of the saxophone hesitated to include it in their symphonic works. Why? Political issues within the musical community, collusion between the instrument makers and musicians of Paris, and Sax’s own dynamic personality all combined to prevent the successful introduction of the saxophone into the orchestra.
Sax’s biggest pitfall was his rapid creation of enemies: “Brash, arrogant, and supremely self-confident, Sax was the embodiment of the fiery nineteenth-century Romantic.” His pridefulness and his constant desire to improve the mechanics of all wind instruments infuriated musicians and conductors alike, and his insolence alienated other instrument makers and the public during presentations of his instruments. He was so audacious that he suggested his instruments be used in the most prestigious French military bands despite not being from France. Ultimately, the French government was persuaded by Sax and the sounds of his inventions, which thus began a bitter enmity with the established instrument makers of Paris, and Sax’s competitors, who would begin to obstruct the introduction of his instruments, most notably the saxophone.
Sax also disregarded traditional manufacturing practices in France, given that he was also the inventor of his instruments. He effectively cut out small instrument shops that supplied parts to large manufacturing companies, since he could make his own parts. The French instrument makers were alienated by his practices and by his number of patents, which continued to increase steadily. On March 3, 1846 the first subpoena was issued on behalf of Parisian manufacturers including Raoux, Halary, Buffet, Gambaro, and Besson, who had organized to question the validity of Sax’s patents and protest the French government’s decision to use Sax’s instruments. Sax’s competitors also attempted to challenge the originality of the saxophone by purchasing several of Sax’s early instruments and having them secretly shipped to neighboring countries where the serial numbers were removed and re- engraved and then openly returned to Paris as instruments of foreign manufacture.
The constant stream of lawsuits succeeded in delaying the patent process and drained Sax of financial resources while also increasing public attention that served to tarnish Sax’s character. Sax’s rivals constantly questioned the validity of his patents and the moral fiber of the man himself. This created apprehension for composers and musicians toward Sax’s instruments, particularly the newly invented and often-disputed saxophone. Big yikes.
In addition to his political and personal conflicts, Sax had trouble integrating his invention into orchestras because of the instrument itself. Although it had been praised for its beautiful voice and great facility, the saxophone lacked precise intonation and few composers and listeners understood exactly how its sound could be incorporated into the orchestra. For this reason, it was either cast aside completely, or used solely to color an orchestral piece as a solo instrument in select portions of larger pieces. Since it was used only as a solo instrument on occasion, the orchestra had no need to hire a professionally trained saxophonist, as a clarinetist could easily learn to double the saxophone.
However, even solo parts are anything but prolific. Small solo parts are found in pieces like Bernstein’s Mass or Mussorgsky’s Pictures at an Exhibition, whereas some larger ones are found in Milhaud’s Creation du Monde and Prokofiev’s 1934 suite from Lieutenant Kije.
However, there were many pieces where the sound of the saxophone could have been applicable. For example, Stravinsky could have included the saxophone in the "Ragtime" section of his L'Histoire du Soldat, yet he chose to refrain from doing so. Why? Stravinsky’s answer was, found in a letter to composer and friend Ingolf Dahl, “I don’t know, to me a saxophone always sounds like a pink slimy worm.”
The sound was misunderstood, but even more misunderstood was the instrument’s image. The saxophone’s association with American popular music led the instrument away from classical music, eventually destroying any hope of establishing a place in the orchestra. For example, it’s inclusion in Vaudeville shows and other pop culture references and movies, in which its heated cries color passionate scenes, made the instrument seem lowbrow and excessively sensual. Supplementing this idea, composer Olivier Messiaen, among many other composers and conductors, claimed that the sound was representative of bad character; it elicited an air of sensuality and indulgence that did not have a place in classical music, which was considered high art. It’s sound called morality into question, hence earning its title as “The Devil’s Horn.” The decadent, wicked sound became a hallmark of “Western” music and ideals, the instrument was banned in Stalin’s USSR and the Empire of Japan and condemned as profane by the Vatican in Italy. Finally, it’s affiliation with jazz led to an association with racial and ethnic groups that were considered “degenerate” in Nazi Germany. Given that the orchestra represented, and today represents, high art and the saxophone represented corruption and uncultured society, the ostracization began and remained intact.
Figure 2. “Entartete Musik,” Printed in May 1938 in Düsseldorf, Germany for ‘Degenerate Music’ art exhibition. Image from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_music.
Fast forward two hundred years, and the saxophone remains on the outside looking in, a product of its rocky history and also the continual affiliation with sensuality in movies and popular music, especially hip hop. In modern terms, the saxophone has reached a level of mainstream banishment that we call a meme. Thank you, Kenny G, Sexy Sax Man from YouTube, and “Careless Whisper.” (Insert eyeroll and long sigh here).
It is only new composers, new conductors who can change the orchestral tradition to usher in a saxophone renaissance that exists in other genres and musical environments such as the jazz world. So please, hear us out.
It is only new composers, new conductors who can change the orchestral tradition to usher in a saxophone renaissance that exists in other genres and musical environments such as the jazz world. So please, hear us out.
Image from https://www.tronviggroup.com
Bibliography
Berlioz, Hector “Le Saxophon.” Journal de Débats, June 12, 1842. Paris, France.
Berlioz, Hector “Nouvelle salle des concerts d’Adolphe Sax.” Journal des Débats, February, 14 1847. Paris, France.
Ferraro, Mathew C. “The Missing Saxophone:Why the Saxophone Is Not a Permanent Member of the Orchestra.” MM diss., The Dana School of Music, 2012.
Hemke, Frederick L. “The Early History of the Saxophone.” DMA diss., University of Wisconsin, 1975.
Horwood, Wally. Adolphe Sax 1814-1894, His Life and Legacy. England: Egon Publishers Ltd. 1980.
Howe, Robert S. “The Invention and Early Development of the Saxophone, 1840-55.” Journal of the American Musical Instrument Society 29 (2003): 97-180.
Ingham, Richard, ed. The Cambridge Companion to the Saxophone. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Kool, Jaap. The Saxophone. Translated by Lawrence Gwozdz. Baldock, Hertfordshire, England: Egon Publishers, 1931/1987.
Linick, Anthony. The Lives of Ingolf Dahl. Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse, 2008.
Rice, Albert R. “Making and Improving the Nineteenth-Century Saxophone.” Journal of the American Musical Instrument Society 35 (2009): 81-122.
Segell, Michael, The Devil’s Horn: The Story of the Saxophone, From Noisy Novelty to King of Cool. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2005.
Waterhouse, William, and Lyndesay G. Langwill. The New Langwill Index: Dictionary of Musical Wind-instrument Makers and Inventors. London: Bingham, 1993.
Berlioz, Hector “Nouvelle salle des concerts d’Adolphe Sax.” Journal des Débats, February, 14 1847. Paris, France.
Ferraro, Mathew C. “The Missing Saxophone:Why the Saxophone Is Not a Permanent Member of the Orchestra.” MM diss., The Dana School of Music, 2012.
Hemke, Frederick L. “The Early History of the Saxophone.” DMA diss., University of Wisconsin, 1975.
Horwood, Wally. Adolphe Sax 1814-1894, His Life and Legacy. England: Egon Publishers Ltd. 1980.
Howe, Robert S. “The Invention and Early Development of the Saxophone, 1840-55.” Journal of the American Musical Instrument Society 29 (2003): 97-180.
Ingham, Richard, ed. The Cambridge Companion to the Saxophone. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Kool, Jaap. The Saxophone. Translated by Lawrence Gwozdz. Baldock, Hertfordshire, England: Egon Publishers, 1931/1987.
Linick, Anthony. The Lives of Ingolf Dahl. Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse, 2008.
Rice, Albert R. “Making and Improving the Nineteenth-Century Saxophone.” Journal of the American Musical Instrument Society 35 (2009): 81-122.
Segell, Michael, The Devil’s Horn: The Story of the Saxophone, From Noisy Novelty to King of Cool. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2005.
Waterhouse, William, and Lyndesay G. Langwill. The New Langwill Index: Dictionary of Musical Wind-instrument Makers and Inventors. London: Bingham, 1993.
