So as much as I would love to design one. and if I learn enough about saxophone anatomy. Even though I'm only a highschool student. I have though of a Completely Theoretical Instrument just for fun. So this instrument would be one octave lower than the Contrabass, 2 octave lower than the bari, 3 octaves lower than the alto, and a whole 4 octaves lower than the sopranino. the range would be that of Db 0 to A 2. and I mean since this is a theoretical instrument, for funsies we're gonna say C 0 to A 2. So it has a low A (concert C) Key. There are 2 ways this instrument could be constructed. either probably 10 feet tall, with centralized key systems, but the connecting tubes, or wires or whatever they are called would be wicked long. like some of the ones on the bari. Notably the side Bb, C, and Eb Keys. Those would be stupid long. Or, similar to Benedikt Eppelsheim's Tubax. It could be coiled up and played with a peg, or even maybe a stand to hold it up, but so it could be played sitting down. This is completely theoretical, and not as insane as things such as the Octo Contrabass Clarinet, or Subcontrabassoon. But yeah, just a fun idea, let me know your opinions. Would it be probably pointless. Yes, is it still funny for us low sax lovers. Also yes.
Octo-Contrabass Saxophone (Completely Theoretical)
- Thread starter pappleshasapples
- Start date
I guess my question would be: to what end? Sure, for the fun of the build, but I can see no practical applications for something like this. Why? Because of the limitations of human hearing.
There is a point where low sounds become just a rumble of mush, and anything below a contra is getting pretty close to that. On Eppelsheim's Bb Tubax it is pretty hard to distinguish individual tones in parts of its range--and Benedikt's horns are works of art and design.
I suggest you look into the low horns of Galassine. Their horns are built mostly as supplemental to church organs, and act as pipes. (Or so the story goes. Videos would indicate this to be true as well.)
If your plan is to build a horn that acts as a supplemental pipe, then sure, it might make sense. But as a solo instrument, or an instrument to play in a small combo/band with others, I'm just not seeing the usefulness/practicality of it.
Speaking of practicality, just the size of it alone would make it completely impractical. (I say this as the owner of a long wrap bass saxophone, that came in a case which doesn't fit into most mid-size cars.)
Related to size are:
1. Transportation issues. Presumably this instrument would at some point need to be transported from point A to point B. What size of vehicle would it need to be moved in? J'Elle Stainer has built many of what they call Extreme saxophones that pose similar problems. They, like the Galassine horns, can't be moved in small to medium-sized cars. Mini vans (?), vans, and perhaps pick up trucks--if a person really wanted to risk it--are really the only way to move some of these instruments.
2. Practice/rehearsal spaces. Since most rooms have a lower ceiling height than 10', just finding a place to set an instrument of this size up to practice it will pose challenges. Naturally its size is also going to limit where, and what kinds of venues, this horn could be used in.
I'm sure there are other considerations as well, but these are just the ones that came to me. Others may very well have different ideas.
I am by no means saying not to try and develop new and inventive design ideas. Some of our most innovative and creative ideas in saxophone design have come from visionaries over the past 30 years. I am just trying to note a few of the realistic pitfalls you are going to encounter when exploring something like this.
There is a point where low sounds become just a rumble of mush, and anything below a contra is getting pretty close to that. On Eppelsheim's Bb Tubax it is pretty hard to distinguish individual tones in parts of its range--and Benedikt's horns are works of art and design.
I suggest you look into the low horns of Galassine. Their horns are built mostly as supplemental to church organs, and act as pipes. (Or so the story goes. Videos would indicate this to be true as well.)
If your plan is to build a horn that acts as a supplemental pipe, then sure, it might make sense. But as a solo instrument, or an instrument to play in a small combo/band with others, I'm just not seeing the usefulness/practicality of it.
Speaking of practicality, just the size of it alone would make it completely impractical. (I say this as the owner of a long wrap bass saxophone, that came in a case which doesn't fit into most mid-size cars.)
Related to size are:
1. Transportation issues. Presumably this instrument would at some point need to be transported from point A to point B. What size of vehicle would it need to be moved in? J'Elle Stainer has built many of what they call Extreme saxophones that pose similar problems. They, like the Galassine horns, can't be moved in small to medium-sized cars. Mini vans (?), vans, and perhaps pick up trucks--if a person really wanted to risk it--are really the only way to move some of these instruments.
2. Practice/rehearsal spaces. Since most rooms have a lower ceiling height than 10', just finding a place to set an instrument of this size up to practice it will pose challenges. Naturally its size is also going to limit where, and what kinds of venues, this horn could be used in.
I'm sure there are other considerations as well, but these are just the ones that came to me. Others may very well have different ideas.
I am by no means saying not to try and develop new and inventive design ideas. Some of our most innovative and creative ideas in saxophone design have come from visionaries over the past 30 years. I am just trying to note a few of the realistic pitfalls you are going to encounter when exploring something like this.
I agree with a lot of what Helen said. There's no reason to create an instrument that sounds notes to the extreme lower or higher end of human hearing. That being said, everyone needs a hobby.
You'd probably need a combination of a large bore and multiple twists. Instead of long keys, you'd probably want to do something with electronics or hydraulics. However, this would probably make the horn extremely cumbersome, which it already is.
You'd also have to invest in a large-ish vehicle, as Helen said. Depends on how long the horn is.
You'd probably need a combination of a large bore and multiple twists. Instead of long keys, you'd probably want to do something with electronics or hydraulics. However, this would probably make the horn extremely cumbersome, which it already is.
You'd also have to invest in a large-ish vehicle, as Helen said. Depends on how long the horn is.
Yeah, I really have no intention of trying to create this. But I mean we all know of Jared De Leon who is in the process of creating the octocontrabass clarinet. using solenoids to close the holes. And Richard Bobo creating the subcontrabassoon. Both instruments with insanely low ranges. So my idea isn't entirely out of the question. But it's still just a fun idea to think about. of how large it would be, and how goofy the instrument would sound. I mean the timbre of the saxophone playing such low notes, is amusing.
I remember from Physics class in college, there are equations to calculate the wavelengths of these lower notes so one can determine by harmonics the practical locations of tone holes on a wind instrument. But, I took that class in college some 47 years ago and haven't touched acoustics, since.
However, they are there and probably a good start. By looking at say, contra bass saxophone layouts, some are quite large to replicate those low notes, would give an idea of what you are dealing with.
However, they are there and probably a good start. By looking at say, contra bass saxophone layouts, some are quite large to replicate those low notes, would give an idea of what you are dealing with.
Somebody beat you to it.
The one I posted is an octa contra in Eb, lower than Stainer’s Bb sub contra. You can clearly see and hear the concert F0, fingered low D in my video.