Longitud de la prevista

17 . Sax ophone fing ering chart fr om Kastner’ s 18

– each key remaining open when the one above it is brought into use – common on modern saxophones. Thus d3 _{and dJ}3 _{were played by separate keys (15 and 17 respec-} tively, the former not being employed when the latter was required); e3 _{had its own} key (18) added to that of d3 _{(15); f}3 _{had its own key (1) added to that of d(}3 _{J17). This} rather cumbersome arrangement of the palm keys would be refined over the following years (see Table 5, p. 56).

The bass in patent sketch no. 2 has three octave keys, a point reinforced in Sax’s description accompanying the diagram. However, both the S-shaped saxophone in the patent and the fingering chart in Kastner’s 186 method indicate an instrument with two octave keys (numbered 16 and 20), with the changeover between them occurring at gJ2_{. The three-octave key arrangement appears to have been deemed impractical} and two octave keys quickly became standard. It is conceivable that the third octave key was something of a late and possibly experimental addition, since in 183 the writer Castil-Blaze had noted that the saxophone was equipped with nineteen keys, not the twenty illustrated in the patent.2

The nominal playing pitches Sax stipulates for the instruments in his patent bear only a passing resemblance to today’s saxophone family. Saxophone number 1 is described as an ‘Ea tenor saxophone’, the lowest note of which was written b0_, sounding D; the highest note dJ3_{, sounding fJ}1_{. This would make the instrument} equivalent to today’s baritone saxophone. Saxophone number 2 was not given a descriptive title but was pitched in C, with a written lowest note of Ba₁. This low fingering appears quickly to have been left behind as the instrument developed; in all other cases the lowest note on early saxophones was written b0 _{(modern instruments} descend to ba0 _{or a}0_{). Sax notes that this instrument could also be made in the key of} Ba, in which case its lowest note would sound Aa₁. Such an instrument would be equivalent to today’s bass saxophone. Sax’s placing of it in this order shows that he also thought of it as such, even if he omitted the name at this point. Why this instru- ment should be indicated as a C bass rather than the Ba of the prototype is unclear.3 Saxophone number 3 was described as a ‘Contrabass saxophone in G’, which could also be made in Aa, and number  was described as a ‘Bourdon’ (in this sense meaning ‘large’ or ‘low’) which was again pitched in C, with a possible version in Ba listed. The other four models were described as being ‘in the same keys as the preceding instru- ments, but one octave higher’. Thus, at this stage some fourteen models of saxophone were theoretically available, or under consideration; however only two were laid out in any detail, again suggesting strongly that Sax had plans for a larger family of related instruments but that the necessary development of the others had yet to be completed.

Even Sax appears not have been quite clear what might be possible, since the patent itself is inherently contradictory. Sax suggests that numbers 5–8 are at the same pitch as numbers 1–, but one octave higher. This, however, would mean that a saxophone made one octave higher than number  (the Bourdon) would duplicate exactly saxo- phone number 2, the unnamed ‘bass’ saxophone. One possible explanation is that the intended higher instruments were a modern Ba tenor (no. 5, an octave higher than no. 2), an Ea alto (no. 6, an octave higher than no. 1), a Ba soprano (no. 7, an octave higher than no. 5), and an Ea sopranino (no. 8, an octave higher than no. 6).

Not only does Sax’s patent explicitly demonstrate the connection with the ophi- cleide, it also shows the relationship between these early saxophones and Sax’s 1838 bass clarinet. In particular, the curved bell of saxophone number 1 is reminiscent of the alternative curved bell Sax had proposed in 1838, and the swan-shaped crooks of saxophones 5 and 6 also demonstrate clear parallels with the crook drawn in the bass clarinet patent.5

By the time the saxophone patent was granted, in June 186, the S-shaped ‘tenor- baritone’ saxophone appears to have been supplanting the larger ‘ophicleide’ version. The patent itself suggests an evolution from one to the other, since it makes clear the different arrangement of octave keys on the two instruments, and the different ranges available. The ongoing evolution of the instrument is also evidenced by the oldest surviving saxophone (serial no. 63), one of these S-shaped ‘tenor-baritone’ models most likely dating from 186–8. The instrument shows some variation from the patent sketch, particularly in being made from 5 sections rather than 6, in the shape and position of the low b0 _{key behind the bell, and in having rather different keywork for} the low c1 _{and ea}1 _{linkages. The pillars holding the keys are soldered directly onto the} body of the instrument rather than being attached to small platforms as on later models, and the instrument has a mix of flat springs and needle springs, whereas the latter would subsequently become the norm. Significantly, the fingering for e3 _has changed. Whereas this had previously been fingered entirely with the left hand palm

18. The oldest surviving saxophone, dating