reprint from sound and score - isbn 978 90 5867 976 5 - ©...

Reprint from Sound and Score - ISBN 978 90 5867 976 5 - © Leuven University Press, 2013

Sound & ScoreEssays on Sound, Score and NotationEdited by Paulo de AssisWilliam BrooksKathleen Coessens

Leuven University Press


Table of Contents

5 PreludePaulo de Assis

Part I: Score and Idea

12 Chapter1WhatIsayandWhatIdo:TheRoleofComposers’OwnPerformancesofTheirScoresinAnsweringOurResearchQuestionsaboutTheirWorksandHowWeShouldInterpretThemJeremy Cox

33 Chapter2“TheMysteriousWhetherSeenasInspirationorasAlchemy”:SomeThoughtsontheLimitationsofNotationPaul Roberts

39 Chapter3ArtisticPractice,Methodology,andSubjectivity:The“ICan”asPracticalPossibilityandOriginalConsciousnessAndreas Georg Stascheit

47 Chapter4FromTerritoriestoTransformations:AntonWebern’sPianoVariationsOp.27asaCaseStudyforResearchin-and-throughMusicalPracticeDarla Crispin

61 InterludeI:ExploringMusicalIntegrityandExperimentationKathleen Coessens

Part II: Mapping the Interface

68 Chapter5PoemasScore:FindingMelodiesforUnnotatedTroubadourSongsRobin T. Bier

83 Chapter6SoundDrifts:ThePhenomenonofStylisticChangeintheInterpretationofFixedTextsAnna Scott

94 Chapter7PressionRevised:AnatomyofSound,NotatedEnergy,andPerformancePracticeTanja Orning

110 Chapter8TheIn(visible)SoundMiguelángel Clerc

122 InterludeII:TheScoreonShiftingGroundsKathleen Coessens


Part III: Extending the Boundaries

130 Chapter9TheBeginningofHappiness:ApproachingScoresinGraphicandTextNotationVirginia Anderson

143 Chapter10ClosingtheGapbetweenSoundandScoreinthePerformanceofElectroacousticMusicGregorio García Karman

165 Chapter11NotationalPerspectiveandComprovisationSandeep Bhagwati

178 InterludeIII:TheScorebeyondMusicKathleen Coessens

Part IV: Choreographies of Sound

184 Chapter12APhysicalInterpretationofaScoreinaListeningAttitudeSusanne Jaresand and Maria Calissendorff

195 Chapter13ScoreasRelationship:FromScorestoScoreSpacestoScorescapesYolande Harris

206 Chapter14DrawingandtheScoreAnne Douglas

218 PostludeKathleen Coessens

221 Personalia

227 Index


EditorPaulodeAssisWilliamBrooksKathleenCoessens

AuthorsVirginiaAndersonPaulodeAssisSandeepBhagwatiRobinT.BierMariaCalissendorffMiguelángelClercParadaKathleenCoessensJeremyCoxDarlaCrispinAnneDouglasYolandeHarrisSusanneJaresandGregorioGarcíaKarmanTanjaOrningPaulRobertsAnnaScottAndreasGeorgStascheit

Copy editorEdwardCrooks

Series editorWilliamBrooks

Lay-outStudioLucDerycke

©2013byLeuvenUniversityPress/UniversitairePersLeuven/PressesUniversitairesdeLouvain.Minderbroedersstraat4B–3000Leuven(Belgium)

Allrightsreserved.Exceptinthosecasesexpresslydeterminedbylaw,nopartofthispublicationmaybemultiplied,savedinautomateddatafileormadepublicinanywaywhatsoeverwithouttheexpresspriorwrittenconsentofthepublishers.

isbn9789058679765d/2013/1869/50nur:663

This book is published in the Orpheus Institute Series.

The fourteen essays in this volume are selected and extended versions of papers presented at the conference ‘Sound & Score’, held at at the Orpheus Institute in December 2010.


143

ClosingtheGapbetweenSoundand

ScoreinthePerformanceofElectroacousticMusic

Gregorio García KarmanExperimental Studio of the SWR Freiburg

and University of Huddersfield

Fundamentally,notationisaserviceabledeviceforcopingwithimponderables.Precisionisnevertheessenceincreativework.Subliminalman(therealcreativeboss)getsalongfamouslywithmaterialofsuchlowdefinition,thatanyself-respectingcomputerwouldhavetorejectitasunprogrammable.Creativeworkdefinesitself.Thereforeconfrontthework.1(RobertoGerhard[quotedinCage1969,240].)

Thisarticlediscussestheproblemofthescoreinthecontextofelectroacousticmusicperformance.Thequestionofnotationandtransmissionofperformancepracticesandtheroleofdocumentationinthemaintenanceofthisrepertoire(BernardiniandVidolin2005,IRCAM2007,Penycook2008),thedependenceon ephemeral electronic devices and software (Burns 2001, Puckette 2001,Wetzel 2007), the representation and the performance of space (Bayle 1992,Wyatt1999,Tutschku2001,VandeGorne2002),orthehighdemandsposedtotheeditor(Richard1993,Brech2007)aresomeimportantconsiderationsinwhichtheemergentfieldofelectroacousticmusicperformanceshouldbeinscribed.HereIwanttobringforwardtheroleoftheperformer,addressingthe“imperfect”natureoftheelectroacousticmusicscoreasasalientfeaturein the context of historical and contemporary musical practices. Through anumberofexamplesbasedonmyexperienceswiththeperformanceofworksfor tape, mixed, and live electronics, I will examine those important consid-erationsbydiscussingdifferentaspectsofthescoreinelectroacousticmusicperformance: lutherie as a score-reading practice, the performer’s scores inthe context of new compositions and historical works, the relation betweenperformance and score edition, the score as mediator, the score and the

1 Cage1969,[240].ThefirstthreesentencesareRobertoGerhard’sresponsetoCage’srequestforatextaboutnotation;thelasttwosentenceswereprobablyaddedbyCagehimselforbyhisco-editor,AlisonKnowles.

Chapter Ten


Gregorio Garcia Karman

144

performanceofspace,andtheconnectionsbetweenscore,analysisandlisten-ing.Theinterpretationofelectroacousticmusicwillbepresentedasaskilled,creative,anddecision-demandingactivity,perhapsakintotheimprovisationalmannerisms of the Renaissance and Baroque (Kientzy 2003 [2009]). At thesametime,wantingtomeaningfullyengagethedialogueinitiatedbythescore,theperformerwillseektoreadbetweenthelinesandtoquestionthecoher-enceofhisinterpretation.

I.

Playing the tape recorder in the dissociated timeIn the 1950s, the direct manipulation of electronically generated soundsappeared to be a compelling answer to the conflict created by Webern’sexpandedtwelve-tone-technique;thelimitsoftheplayablehadbeenreachedas a consequence of the rationalisation of all musical parameters (Eimert1954,43).Composerscelebratedtheopportunitytoaspiretothe“objectivecontemplationofproportionsandbalance,”(Goeyvaerts1955,15)freeofthe“living parasitic sound” (Eimert 1955, 13) inherent in human performance.Insteadofwritingdownthemusicasascorethathadtobetranslated intosoundby instrumentalorvocal interpreters,a soundcompositioncouldbefashionedexactly intheformthat itwouldreachthe listener.However, theresistanceposedbytheelectronicmediumsuggestedaparallelismbetweentheworkinthestudioandinstrumentalperformance.Forinstance,thecorre-spondencebetweenStockhausenandGoeyvaerts(Sabbe1981,49–50)revealsthatin1953,whilethelatterstillbelievedintheexactitudeofelectronicgen-erators as a means to achieve a pure translation of his compositional ideas,Stockhausenarguedthatthenewmediumwasatleastasconditionedbytheinstrumental and human circumstances of the electronic realisation as wasa traditionalperformancewithconventional instruments.The liveact tookplaceinthestudioinsteadoftheconcerthall,anoveltythataccentuatedtheroleoftheperformingauthor.2(Eimertdescribed“playingthetaperecorderinthedissociatedtime”as“oneofthemostwonderfulactsofmusicalpro-duction.”3)Inthescoresofthesine-wavecompositionsproducedattheWDR,conventionalnotationwasreplacedbysetsoflinesandpolygonsdeterminingtheacousticpropertiesofeachoftheconstituentpartials.4Butintheend,itremained controversial whether the “instructions for the electro-acousticalrealisation”5hadthesymbolicvalueofrealmusicalwritingandwhethermusi-cianscouldreadthosescores.

2 “Inthesamewaythepianistplaysthepiano,somustthecomposerplaythetaperecorder”(Eimert1955,8).Author’stranslation.

3 “MagnetophonspieleninderdissoziiertenZeitisteinerderwunderbarstenmusikalischenProduktion-sakte”(Eimert1955,9).Author’stranslation.

4 ThereaderwillrememberthisformofwritingwithreferencetoKarheinzStockhausen’sStudie II(1954),perhapsoneofthemostpopularexamplesofascoreforelectronicmusic.

5 “Unliketheusualmethodsofnotation,thereisnoscore,butmerelyworkinginstructionsfortheelec-tro-acousticalrealisationofthecomposition”(Eimert,Enkel,andStockhausen1954,52).


Closing the Gap Between Sound and Score

145

Aural traditionA new form of performance—the practice of sound diffusion6—emergedwiththeadventofmusique concrète.Oneforward-lookingexampleofnotationconceived for the spatial projection of a composition fixed on tape is PierreHenry’sscoreforthedecoupage spatial(spatialdecoration)ofOlivierMessiaen’sTimbres—Dureés from 1952.7 The pioneer practitioners of musique concrètereferredtotwotechniques for thepresentationofspatialmusicalreadyrec-ognisableinHenry’sscore:(a)relief statique (staticrelief ),thedistributionofsoundsoverdifferentloudspeakerchannels,8resemblingthespatialextensionof the orchestra; or (b) relief cinématique (kinematic relief ), the instantane-ous movements of sound around the audience, shaped by the chef d’orchestre spatialwavinghisarmsatthepupitre d’espace(Moles1960,127–129).Theword“acousmatic”—usedbyPierreSchaeffertorefertoadeliberatechoiceofpurelistening—was later adopted by François Bayle to designate a genre that isfirstcomposedinthestudioandlaterdiffusedinapublicperformancewithan orchestra of loudspeakers.9 Worthy of attention—in terms of the corre-spondencebetweensoundandscore—isthatinacousmaticmusictheactoflisteningisattheforegroundofallmusicalactivity.Thelisteningexperienceguidesthecomposerinthecreativeprocessesinthestudio10andalsomediatesbetweenthefixedworkandthesoundprojection,11wheretheresources12andmusicalinterpretationcomeintoplay.The“techniqueofmakinganawarenessthatisestablishedsimplyandsolelyfromfactsofbothanintuitiveandcreativeperception,”13(Bayle2008,242)isthepointofdepartureforapracticeinwhichthescoreisnotanecessaryconditionatanyofitsstagesofproduction.

II.

The dilemma of obsolescenceLive-electronic music became a major sphere of activity during the 1960s.14Composers incorporated into their scores parts for new electronic devicessuch as filters and ring modulators (two of the most popular early means ofsoundprocessing).InMusik und Graphik(1959[1963]),reviewingthedifferent

6 Thewords“diffusion,”“projection,”and“spatialisation”areconsideredequivalentinthistext.SeeWyatt(1999)foradiscussionoftheuseoftheseterms.

7 SeeMessiaen(2004).Thefirstpageofthisscoreisreproducedonp.15oftheINA/GRMCD-booklet. 8 Thesoundswereseparatedbymeansoffilteringspecifiedregistersorusingamulti-tracktape(Moles

1960,126). 9 See,e.g.,Emmerson(2007,Chap.6),foranintroductiontodifferentapproachestomulti-loudspeaker

sounddiffusion. 10 “Whathemakesandhisgesturesareinducedbytheeffectofauralperception,thespontaneousunder-

standingofhisworkingsbytrial-and-error”(Bayle2008,242). 11 ForBayle,theideaofprojectionalsoplaysacriticalroleinawidersense.Acousmaticmusicisa“music

thatcanonlybeunderstoodintheformofsoundimagesandthatcanonlybeexperiencedarisingouttheirprojection”(Bayle2007,181).

12 AccordingtoBayle,theperformer’sresourcesare:thearrangementofthesoundprojectors,thepecularitiesoftheconcertlocation(width,depth,height,resonance,colour),characteristicsoftheprojectioninstrument(sources,channels,controls),theexternalconditions(atmosphereofthehall,styleofperformance),etc.(Bayle1992,17).

13 Thisisthemeaningofthetermakousma(Bayle2008,242). 14 SeeManning(1993,Chapter8),forastandardintroductiontothisgenre.


146

categoriesofmusicalwriting,15Stockhausenreferstothechangesintroducedinthenotationofelectronicmusicduringthisperiod.Hewrites:

Inthenotationofelectronicmusicaconnectionultimatelyappearsbetweennumericaldataandactionnotation,i.e.,thewaytheelectronicdevicesshouldbeoperated.Notonlymeasurablequantitiesbutalsoqualitativeconceptsareconveyed.Whileinthebeginningitwasbelievedthattheacousticalpropertiesofeverysoundcould(andshould)beexactlydescribed,nowwehaveswitchedovertocharacterizetheinstrument,prescribetherangeofactions,anddesignaschematicillustrationaccordingtowhichtheactionsshouldbeperformed.(Stockhausen1959[1963],181)16

Scores like Mikrophonie I, No. 15 (1964), for six players with tam-tam, twomicrophones, and two filters with potentiometers, or Mixtur, No. 16 (1964),fororchestra,foursine-wavegenerators,andfourringmodulators,areexam-plesofthistrend.Thosescoresprovideanextendedforeworddescribingtheinstrumentsandelectronicdevicesbeingusedandtheirplayingtechniques.Theyalsoestablishanequalitybetweentraditionalinstrumentsandelectronicdevicesbyaddingstavesthatguidetheoperators’actionsduringtheperfor-mance.However,embracingtechnologyalsocontributedtoasubtlereconfigu-rationofcontemporaryscore-relatedpractices.Analyzingtheroleoftheeditorinthemaintenanceofthisrepertoire,MartaBrech(2007,484–5)emphasisesthatthetendencyofcomposersandengineerstousethelatestmachineryanddevelopprototypesand,morerecently,thedependenceofsoftwareoncom-puter architectures and operative systems are problems that often surpassavailableskillsandresources.Inpractice,thelimitedaccessibilityandephem-erallifeoftheoriginalinstrumentshaveencouragedinterpretersengagedinthepresent-dayperformanceofsuchworkstoaddressthisquestionasaninte-gralpartofthescore-readingprocess.

15 Schematicandformulaicwriting,ideographicnotation,actionnotation,listeningscores,scoresforimagining,scoresforperforming,etc.(Stockhausen1959[1963]).

16 Translationbytheauthor.

Figure 1. Maihak W49 “Hörspielverzerrer” (left), computer simulation in Max/MSP (right).

Fig. 1



147

In connection with the musical examples cited above, I relate two hands-onexperiencesthatexplorethedynamicsofthisinteraction:a. TheW49“Hörspielverzerrer”,[Fig. 1] 17afilterdesignedbytheMaihakcom-

panyfortheNordwestdeutscheRundfunk,wasfirstusedbyStockhauseninMikrophonie I.Sinceonlyafewhundredunitswereproducedinthe1950s,thesesought-afterfiltersarehardtogetholdofnowadays.However,withtheindicationsprovidedbythescore,acomputer-literatemusicianapproachingtheperformanceofthisworkwouldtodayconsiderdevisinga“patch”toproduceanequivalenteffectinaDSP-programmingenviron-ment18suchasPureData19orMax/MSP.20Sensitivetohistoricallyinformedperformances,theenterprisingperformermightevenstudythepossibilityofdevisinganinterfacethatrecreatesthehapticimpressionoftheoriginal“stepped”faders.21Buthowfaithfuldoesthesimulationoftheoriginalfil-terneedtobe?Whatabouttheclarificationinthescore,reading“exampleofthedivisioninHzofthe‘W49’filterusedso far”(Stockhausen1974a,14;author’sitalics)—doesthisnotsuggestthepossibilityorevenaninvitationtoexperimentwithadifferentsetofcut-offfrequencies?Manywouldnow-adaysconsidertheuseofW49Maihakfilterstobethegenuineapproach.However,mighttheimplementationofa“click-freefilter”(Stockhausen1974a,10)havebeenanimprovementtotheearsofthecomposer?Or,rather,aretheaudibleartefactsthatoccurwhensweepingthroughthefrequencygridofaW49aninherentpartofthemusic?Iinvitethereadertoconsiderhis/herownanswersbeforecontinuingtothenextparagraph.

b. Mysecondexampledealswiththelive-electronicapparatusofMixtur 2003, No. 16 2/3(2003),forfiveinstrumentalgroups,foursine-wavegeneratorplayers,foursoundmixerswithfourringmodulators,andsoundprojectionist.Inthescoreofthiscomposition,thefourpartsforthesine-wave-generatorplayersarenotatedasfrequencyenvelopessupplementedwithvaluesinHzaswellaspitchesapproximatedtoachromaticscale(Stockhausen2007a,VII),spanningoverarangeofthir-teen(!)octaves,fromC-5toC8,or0.5and4186Hz,respectively.FortheperformanceswhichIamdiscussing,22accesstothehistoricalinstrumentswouldhavebeenentirelyfeasible,23buttheexperiencegainedduringthepreparatorystagesledtoquestionsaboutthesuitabilityoftheorigi-nalsetup.Duringtestingbytheauthor,thetuningpossibilitiesoftheavailablesine-wavegeneratorsdidnotseemtoaccordwiththescaleofdetailandtuningrangeaskedforinthescore.Afterdiscussingthiswith

17 Allillustrationsarebytheauthorunlessotherwisestated. 18 Perhapsusingconvolutionorapproximatingthecoefficientsofthedigitalfilterequivalenttothe

analoguecircuit. 19 http://www.puredata.org. 20 http://www.cycling74.com. 21 ThosewhohavehadtheopportunitytohandleaMaihakW49willhavenoreservationsabouttheinflu-

encethatthemechanicsofthisdevicehaveontheformbywhichthefiltergesturescanbearticulated. 22 PerformanceswiththesetupdescribedheretookplaceinSalzburgandMunich:SalzburgerFestspiele,30

August2006,LehrbauhofSalzburg(WolfgangLischke/DeutschesSymphonieOrchester/AndréRichard/ExperimentalstudiooftheSWR);Musica-Viva-Festival,25January2008,HerkulessaalMunich(LucasVis/SymphonieorchesterdesBayerischenRundfunks/AndréRichard/ExperimentalstudiooftheSWR).

23 TheprojectwasundertheauspicesoftheExperimentalstudiooftheSWR,aninstitutionthatwouldcertainlyhavebeenabletoprovideasetofanaloguesine-wavegeneratorsandring-modulators.


148

Stockhausen,anewcontrollerwasdeveloped24thatwasoptimisedfortheperformanceoftheintonationcurvesandthatwouldovercometheim-precisionandgesturallimitationsoftheoriginalsetupwhilepreservingtheexpressivenessoftheanalogueimplementation.25[Fig. 2]

In proposing two contrasting case studies and formulating such questions Iwantedtoconveythenotionthattheremaybearangeofalternativesdeservingconsideration.Findingsolutionsthroughtryingtoimaginethesoundrealisa-tionoftheaforementionedscoresisalsotakingmusicaldecisions.

The performer’s scoreIn studying performance itself, the significance of performers’ annotationshasprobablybeenunderestimated. Inparticular,performancesof themusicdiscussedherecommonlyresult in largeassortmentsofnotes,sketches,andschematicdiagramsthatendup incorporated intotheperformers’scoresorinto other forms of supplementary documentation. To consider the issue oftheperformer’swritingistobringtolightthedetailsofamusicalpractice.Itisconvenienttoexaminetwodifferentpolesofthispractice:thefirststagingofanewcomposition,andthecontemporaryperformanceofaclassicalwork.

Anewcompositionisbeingreadiedforitspremiere—thescenarioinwhichtheintentionfirstmeetsthereal.Instrumentalsourcesandelectronictransfor-mations,coupledtoanarrayofloudspeakersandmicrophones,convergeforthefirsttimeinanacousticspace—anunstableenvironmentsensitivetothesmall-estchangesintheaggregatesystem.Anumberofvariablesintheinteractionofinstrumentsandelectronics—e.g.,playingtechniques,thepositionsofthetransducers,orthetechnologicalparameters—willneedtobeadjustedduringtherehearsals.Asaresultofthisprocess,thesounddirector(Klangregissseur)26

24 Inadditiontotheauthor,JoachimHaas,StefanHuber,andThomasHummelwerecontributorstothisproject.

25 SeealsotheforewordtoMixtur 2003, No.16 2/3(Stockhausen2007a). 26 Klangregie(sounddirection)istheusualwaytocharacterisetheactivityofperformingaworkwith

electronicsintheGermanlanguage.Otherterms,like“soundprojectionist”orsonista(Kientzy2003[2009]),describesimilarrolesinotherlanguages.Inaddition,diversenamesaregiventothemusicianshipexercisedintheproductionfacilitiesoftheinstitutionalstudios,likeMusikinformatiker(ExperimentalstudiooftheSWR),andrealisateur en informatique musicaleor“computermusicdesigner”(IRCAM).Dependingonthepracticeatagivenstudiobothfunctionsmaybeeithertheresponsibilityofasinglepersonorundertakenbyspecialistsineachdomain.

Fig. 2

Figure 2. Detail of the “Zeigerrad,” a novel controller developed for the performance of Karlheinz Stockhausen’s Mixtur 2003, No. 16 2/3 (2003). Diameter = 36 cm.



149

Fig.3

Figure 3. Jimmy Lopez’s Íncubus III (2009). Filarmonika LLC. A detail of the performer’s score with annotations for the live electronics (p. 9).

empiricallyacquiresthesetofactionsthatwillrequireattentioninthecourseoftheperformance.Aftertheconcert,his/herscorewillcontaintheannotationstakendownduringtherehearsals,aswellasthosecorrespondingtoapreviousstep,thepreparationofthescore;andtogethertheseconnectthepreexistingnotationwiththesetofactionsnecessarywhenplayingthepiece.27

I will take an excerpt from Jimmy Lopez’s Íncubus III (2009), for clarinet,percussion,andliveelectronics,asanexample.[Fig. 3]Intheprintedscore,thelive-electronic part (“L.E.”) is indicated by the composer using descriptivekeywords (in the illustration we see “VCl: Fragm. + Pitch Shift” and “Vperc:SynchronizedCrowd”).Belowthispart,uptofourprerecordedlayersarewrit-tenoutondedicatedstavesusingtraditionalnotation(onlylayers“A”and“D”areactiveinthisexcerpt).Thehandwrittennotes infigure3,takendownbythesounddirector,completetheinformationandprovidefurtherunderstand-ingofthereal-timeprocessescarriedoutbythecomputersaswellasthespa-tial behaviour of these processes. In this example, we can see that the voicepartoftheclarinetplayer(“VCL”)issubjecttogranularprocessing(“G3”)andtheresultingsoundparticlesaresubsequentlyassignedamovementinspace(“H3”);simultaneouslythevoicepartofthepercussionistismultipliedusinga

27 Onoccasionsthecomposermaydecidetoaskthesounddirectortoincludethoseannotationsinthescore,butthisisfrequentlyhinderedbytimeconstraintsifthescoreiseditedbeforethefirstperformance.


150

Figure 4. Íncubus III. Sound processing circuit corresponding to cue 19.

Figure 5. Malika Kishino’s Lebensfunke II (2007/09). Edizioni Suvini Zerboni. A detail of the performer’s score assembly (p. 20).

Fig.5

Fig. 4



151

four-voiceshufflingalgorithm(“G5–8”)staticallyassignedtofourloudspeak-ers (“L1, 2, 3, 8”). The sine wave chorale (“D”)—an eight-channel recordingwhosedynamicprofileistobeshapedlive(f,p,cresc.,ff,dim.,p,ppp)—isaddi-tionally routed to a stereo reverberation (“HALL”), the outputs from whicharesenttotwoindependentspatialisationprocesses(“H3”and“H4”).AlltheabbreviationscitedaresimplypartofaconventionthatIestablishedtorefertothefadersandknobsthatconstitutethetactileinterfaceforsoundproduc-tionduringtheperformance.Cues“17”,“18”and“19”designatethreedifferentsoundprocessingcircuitsstored inthememoryof thecomputer,ofwhichIkeptadetailedrecordinaseparatebooklet.[Fig. 4]

In Malika Kishino’s Lebensfunke II (2007/09), for bass drum and live elec-tronics,wehaveavariantofthesolutionpresentedinthepreviousexample.Initially,thescoreprovidedbythecomposer—basedonLebensfunke(2007),apreviousversionofthework,forbassdrumandtape—hadtwohandwrittenstaves: one notating the part for the bass drum (“Gr[oße] Tr[ommel]”),anda second representing the electronics (“Elektr[onik]”). In realising the newversion of the work, which contains a complex live-electronic part,28 I fabri-cated a collage combining Kishino’s score with a schematic representationofthesoundtransformationcircuits[Fig. 5]tobeabletokeeptrackofthethir-ty-fourfaders29thatneededtobecontrolledduringtheperformance.UnlikeÍncubus III,wherethesignal-flowdiagrams[Fig. 4]consistofaseparatebooklet,inLebensfunke II[Fig. 5]Iincorporatedthosediagramsdirectlyonthecomposer’sscoreinasimplifiedformthatwouldfacilitatemoreimmediaterecognitionofthemixingstructuresthatareactiveineachcue.

Movingawayfromtheperformanceofnewworks,attheotherextremewehavethecontemporaryperformanceofaclassicalwork.Inordertogaininsightsinto the stylistic and technical aspects of the composition, the interpreterwishingtoproduceahistorically informedperformancewouldseektocom-paretheeditedscorewithmanuscriptsandvintagerecordings.Assuggestedbythepreviousexamples,scoresthatcontainannotationsbytheoperatorofthe antique instruments (as well as connection diagrams, installation plans,andotherperipheraldocumentationcorrespondingtopreviousconcerts)canbe invaluable references. But different sources might also supply competingsetsofinstructions.Forinstance,theavailablematerialsofCristóbalHalffter’sPlanto por las víctimas de la violencia (1971), for ensemble and live electronics,reveal that the electronic part has been subject to a number of adjustmentsinsubsequentpresentationsofthework.30ThesamesituationhappenswithVariaciones sobre la resonancia de un grito (1976–77), foreleven instrumentalists,

28 Arefinedfabricofrapidlychangingsoundprocessingmodulescombinedwithpre-recordedmultichan-nelfilesthatareprojectedthroughelevenloudspeakersinstalledintwodifferentheightssurroundingtheaudience.

29 Thefaderscorrespondtotheinputsandoutputsofthesoundtransformationcircuits.Notincludedinthistotalaretheloudspeakermasterfadersandthethreeadditionalfadersthatareusedfortheamplificationofthebassdrum,allofwhichalsoneedtobeadjustedduringtheperformance.

30 Forinstance,technicaldocumentationcorrespondingtoanundatedperformancewithsixloudspeak-ers—insteadoftheeightaskedforinthescore—depictsaquitedifferentorganisationofthespatialmovements,andthefilterbankisomitted(García-Karman2006,24).



152

Fig.6

Figure 6. Cristóbal Halffter’s Variaciones por la resonancia de un grito für 11 Instrumente, Tonband und Live-Elektronik (1976 / 77). A detail of the performer’s score with annotations for the live electronics (pp. 33–34). © Copyright 1977 by Universal Edition (London) Ltd., London/UE 16663.

tape,andliveelectronics[Fig. 6],afurthercompositionbyHalffterinwhichthepublishedscoreandthehistoricalrealisationsoftheworkdivergeinsomefun-damentalaspects,specificallyregardingthespatialisationoftheinstruments.31Inmyexperience,suchdiscrepancies—whetherfollowingfrommusicalcrite-riaorascribedtotheflexibilityorlimitationsoftechnology—arecommoninabroadrangeofworkswithliveelectronics.

The perfomer as editorIntricatetooisthesituationregardingthescoresofLuigiNono.Nonohim-selftreatedthetapeasaninstrument,stressingthathisactionsatthecon-sole “depend on the performance space, depend on the instant” (Riede1986, 18), and his live-electronic executions have been described as drivenby “a certain freedom in altering the planned effects at each performance”(Rizzardi1999,52).32Moreover,Nonoissaidtohaveelaboratedthedetailsof

31 InHalffter(1976–77)theamplificationoftheinstrumentsisextensivelysubjectedtospatialtreatment,butthedocumentationavailablesuggeststhatthiswasomittedinthehistoricalperformances.

32 SuchistheintentionreflectedinNono’swords,chosenastheforewordtothescoreofPost-prae-ludium,onehislastcreations.Therehesays,“theprovidednotation,thenewexecutiontechniqueaswellasthelive-electronicpart,theyalltogetherembodytheeffectofoneofmyinterpretations”(Nono1987[1992],Foreword;author’stranslation).



153

hiscompositions incooperationwithperformerschosenfortheirabilityto“become independent of a strict notation and perform the process that car-riedthecompositionalintention”(Rizzardi1999,47),requiringthemtogetactivelyinvolvedinthemusicaldecisions.Perhapswecouldpositthenotionof“oralscores”(55)inwhichtwoprocesses—thecomposer’sproposalsandtheperformer’sreactionstothese—converge.Moreprecisely,theincompleteformulationofNono’sscoreshastobeunderstoodastheresultoflongphasesofacousticresearchinthestudioandofexplorationofextendedperformancetechniqueswiththeinterpreters.AndréRichardexplainsthatonlyaftersuchpreparatorywork,“Nono—usuallyinashorttime—draftedthescore.Inthisphaseheelucidated,onlyasareminder,theperformancetechniquesfortheinterpreters.Thenewcompositionswerethenrehearseddirectlyintheplacewhere the premiere took place” (Richard 1993, 100; author’s translation).Nono’s own manuscripts provide only sparing information regarding thesoundprocessing,buttheelectronictransformations—programmedduringtheworkatthestudioandcarefullyadjustedduringtherehearsalsattheper-formancespace—were“aclearlydefinedsituation”(101).Today, it iseasytounderstandtheimportanceoftheworkdonejointlybyNono’scollaboratorsandtheeditorinthepublicationofthosescores.Suchaventurehastocon-fronttheproblemofmakingthetransmissionoftheworkpossiblewhilstnotprovidingaformulationthatmayseemtoodefinitive,contradictingtheorig-inal intention. Referring to this dilemma, André Richard appeals for goodsenseinfindingtherightbalancebetweenaprecisedefinitionofthetextandthenecessaryallowanceoffreedom(103).

III.

The score as mediatorI propose now to consider the following five observations, taking the previ-ouslydiscussedinstancesaspointsofreference:i. Withthearrivaloftherecordingmedium,thetraditionaldifferentiation

betweentheconceptionofthemusicalworkandtheactofinterpretationwasobscured.Soundrecordingofferedawayoffixingandmanipulatingmusicalideasandalsoameansforlisteningdirectlytotheresultofthesemanipulations.Thescorelostitssignificanceasthemediatorbetweencompositionandperformance,twoactivitiesthatnolongertakeplaceindifferentspacesandtimes.However,theactofwriting,whetherenactedonpaper,aswastraditional,orwhethermanifestedonmagnetictapeorcomputers,continuedtotakeplaceinthestudio.Soalsodidperformanceandimprovisation(regardlessofwhowassittingatthecontrolsoftheelectronicdevices,beitthecomposerhimselforanotherperson).TheGermanmusicologistVolkerStraebelsuggeststhatoverlookingthereali-sationandperformanceofelectroacousticmusicmayhavebeenstrength-enedbytheidealisticattitudeoftheGermantradition,incontrastwithotherschoolslikeAmericanexperimentalmusicwherecraftsmanshipremainedcentral(Straebel2009).



154

ii. Thecommonviewthatelectroacousticnotationissomethingimperfectcanbeinterpretedastheformulationofanimplicitanswertoaprimordi-alquestion:whetherthescoreistobeconsideredasa“text”oras“mereinstructions”(Dalhaus1965).Lookingatthescoreasasetofinstructionsimpliestherecognitionofambiguityinthepotentialvariabilityofitsrealisations.Inherentinthisinterpretationistheideathatsuchambigu-ityisadefect.Atext,ontheotherhand,canbeincompleteifthatwhichisnotnotatedisself-evident.Likeotherformsofwriting,ascoreforelectroacousticmusicisnotaneutralmeansofrepresentationbuttheexpressionofasystemofrelations;youhavetounderstandthelanguagetobeabletoreadthetext.Butthenotationofelectroacousticmusicisnotbasedonawidelyacceptedsystemofsigns;thereareanumberofdialects.Moreover,aswehaveseenwithNono’sscores,theideathatthenotatedisessentialandpersistent—andthenon-notated,variableandperipheral—issometimesmisleading.

iii. Inallmusicaltraditions,agivenmusicalpractice—whichextendsbeyondthescore—isnecessaryforthe“correct”performanceofawork.Acous-maticmusicisagoodexampleofatraditionwherelisteningandoralityhavetakentheplaceofmusicalwriting.Inacertainsense,whenBayletalkedaboutthethreemomentsofthelisteningexperiencehewaswrit-inga“score”fortheperformanceofacousmaticmusic:(1)perception—whichisrelatedtothesensualexperience,thepositionofthesourcesinthebinauralspaceandtheexplorationofmusicalstrategies;(2)identi-fication—concernedwiththeappearanceofcausalformsanddesigns,theconsciousnessoftheobjects’contoursandlimits,thecomparisonofexperiences,theacquisitionofperspective;and(3)interpretation—are-turntothefirstintuitioninwhichthespaceoffiguresisprojectedontoasystemofcorrespondencesthatconnecttheactoflisteningwithmeaningandemotion,activatingthesettingtomusic(Bayle1992).Scoresthem-selvesareconstructsoftraditions.

iv. Withtheso-called“emancipationofnotation”—whichopenedthedoortoavarietyofgraphicalrepresentationsofsound—itbecomesinterestingtoconsidertowhomthescoreisbeingdirected.Wehavethecomposer’swritingfortheperformer(e.g.,symbolicoractionnotation),thecompos-er’sandtheperformer’sprivatewriting(e.g.,sketches),andwritingad-dressedtothelistener(e.g.,listeningscores).Themultiplicityofwritingsfoundinthescoresofelectroacousticmusic,ruledbypersonalcriteria“tothepointofmakingscoresappearindecipherable”(Eco1964[1982],305),needstobeputinthecontextofsuchlinesofcommunication.Theelec-tronicstudionotonlyofferedthecomposernewinstrumentsandmusicalmaterialsbutalsoprovidedaspacewherenewcommunicationprocessesbetweencomposersandperformerscouldtakeplace.

v. Wemaythinkofcompositionandperformanceasmusicalactivitiesthatimproviseonanexistingpractice(Benson2003).Fromaphenomenolog-icalperspective,musicalworksofallperiodsaresubjecttotwoparallelprocesses:(1)thetendencytowardthecrystallisationofawork,and(2)theworkinflow.Itisinthenatureoftechnologytoresistthefirstbehav-iour.(Theincreasingpaceofdevelopmentandthelackofperspective



155

possiblymakethisphenomenonmoreobvious).Performancetraditionsarethemselveschanging.Traditionalsoentailsthepossibilitythatcontactwiththeoriginalintentionwillbelost.Musicalwritingistheintentionofsound;soundistheexpressionofmusicalintentions.

IV.

On playing spaceSincewealsothinkofspaceintermsofimponderablesandnotonlyasapar-ametricalconstruct,findingsymbolicnotationforthespatialexperienceisanelusiveproblem.Referringtotheroleofscoresinthepracticeofsounddiffu-sionScottWyattwrites:“wefeelthattheexistenceofaprojectionscoreassiststheperformerandreducestheamountoflargescaleimprovisation.Whiletheperformerdoesnothavetofolloweachnotatedmomentwithinthescore,itdoesserveasabasicroadmapreflectingsalientaspectsoftheprojectionist’sperformance design” (Wyatt 1999). François Bayle’s articles are occasionallyaccompaniedwithsketches(1992,15–16,19;2007,10–11,44–46)thatshowdif-ferentsortsofcuesheetsandnotes for thesoundprojectionandthe layoutoftheloudspeakerorchestra,butatthesametimethecomposerconsidersitprematuretodiscussa“projectionscorethatcontinuestobeinitsearlystages”(Bayle1992,20).Wecouldaskifintuition-driven,site-specificscores,inwhichtheprojectionistnotatestheactionstobetakenduringtheperformance,arenotdestined,bytheirveryessence,tobealwaysinapermanentstateofrudi-mentarybeing.Thismightalsobethereasonbehindthetendencytocodifyspace in the form of performance practices (better transmitted by listeningattentivelyintheproximityofthemixingconsole).

Different schools of sound projectionists have considered the question ofthe“collision”ofacompositionrealisedinthestudiowiththerealityofthespacewhereitispresented.Baylespeaksofthe“internalspace,”formedwithintheworkitself,andthe“externalspace,”wheretheworkisheard(Bayle2008,243).DenisSmalleyusestheconceptof“spatialconsonance”and“spatialdis-sonance”torefertothetensionsbetweenthecomposedspaceandthelisten-ingspace(Smalley1991,121).HansPeterHallerandLuigiNonoperceivedthisimbalance as an incentive to new creative possibilities (Haller 1991, 37). Forthem,spacewasaformalaspectofcomposition,butthespacedesignedwasanillusionandthesoundprocessesneededtobeadjustedforeachperformance,opening an on-going dialogue regarding the interpretation of the “sound-space”(Klangraum).33

Spatialfidelityandthesynthesisofsoundfieldsareamongtheinterestsofthe“newspatialobjectivity”(Emmerson2007,163).HerediscussionfocusesontechniquessuchasHigherOrderAmbisonics(HOA)orWaveFieldSynthesis(WFS),whichbenefitfromenvironmentswithcarefullycontrolledconditionsintermsofloudspeakergeometriesandarchitecturalacoustics.Sometimeago,Iattendedtwoconcerts,underthemotto“VonMonozumWellenfeld,”which

33 Forinstance,Haller—discussingthespatialconceptioninPrometeo(1981/84)—explainedthatthesoundspace“wasnewlydeveloped,triedout,listened”foreachperformance(1991,43).



156

offeredauniqueopportunityto listentoanumberofmusicalcompositionswithdifferentspatialisationtechniquesthroughavarietyofdiffusionsystems.Formethemostsuccessfulspatialexperience(intermsofmusicality)wasJohnChowning’sfour-channelcompositionTurenas(1972).34Perhapsthedifferentapproachestothemulti-channelpresentationofelectroacousticmusicsparkcontroversyamongpractitionersandtheoristsofspatialmusic(HarrisonandWilson2010),butIamnottakingsideswhenIexaminetheweaklinksofboththerealisticandidealistictraditionsofspatialisation.Onthecontrary,Ibelievethatitisbeyonddoubtthatthequesttocontrolspatiality—afertilesubjectforprospective exploration and speculative thinking represented by techniqueslikeHOAandWFS—willcontributetoanewlevelofperceptualawarenessandbringunforeseenpossibilitiesformusicyettocome,evenifcompositionandperformanceofspatialityremainsaproblemintheartisticdomain.

Thisdigressiononspacefinisheswithtwoargumentsthatsupportthepoten-tialbenefitofbringingtogetherliveelectronicsandtheperformanceofspace:

1. Thereisfirsttheflexibilityofthesoundstructures.Inlive-electronicmusic,becausesynthesisandprocessingtakeplaceatthetimeofsoundproduction,itispossibletointerferewithandaltertheparametersofareal-timeprocessinordertoobtainacertainquality.Onesuchexampleisthetrivialoperationofadjustingaspatialmovementtowhichaninstru-mentalsource(e.g.,aviolinplayingonstage)issubjectedinacertainsec-tionofamusicalwork.Itsufficestohaveanefficientmethodforchangingandmemorisingthenewvariablesinthecomputer.35ThismayputusinmindofEimert’sperformanceindissociatedtime,exceptthatherethedissociatedperformancetakesplace“insidetheassociatedspace”oftheconcerthallinthecourseofsimulationsorrehearsals.Alloftheparam-etersofthereal-timeprocesseshavepotentialsignificanceasameansofexpression,conspiringwiththeroominwhichtheworkdevelops.

2. Theelectroacousticinstallationforaperformancewithliveelectronicsisaresonatingnetworkofelectroacoustictransducers,computerpro-grams,andspatialarchitecture.Bytheverydefinitionof“liveelectron-ics,”assumingthemostcommonsituation,inwhichmicrophonesandloudspeakerssharethesamespace,theoutputoftheelectroacousticchainfindsawaybacktoitsinput.36Usingappropriateequations,theacousticianisabletopredictthebehaviourofthisrecursivecoupling,basedonthegeometryandtechnicaldataofloudspeakersandmicro-phonesandthepropertiesoftheenclosingroom.Thesoundtechnicianobtainsthesameknowledgebyexploringthethresholdsofaninstal-lationduringasound-check(eventuallysmoothingouttheresonances

34 “VonMonozumWellenfeldII.”Concertperformance,TUBerlinWFS-HörsaalH0104,August2,2008(20:30).

35 Thereaderwillsensetheimportancethattheexperiencedperformeroflive-electronicmusicgivestodesigningalgorithmsthatyieldtherequiredflexibilityduringthepreparationstages.

36 Theconditionsthatmaketheacousticcircuitunstablearegivenbytheso-calledBarkhausenstabilitycriterion,causingacousticfeedback.Forasummary,seeWikipedia.“Barkhausensatbilitycriterion.”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barkhausen_stability_criterion(accessedMarch1,2011).



157

withaparametricfilter).Themusicianwilllearntofindthesereso-nancesthroughacousticexperimentationandattentivelistening,37andcantakeadvantageofthemmusically.38Itisalsopossibleto“tune”theperformancesystembyadjustingthepositionofthemicrophonesandloudspeakers,orchangingtheparametersofthetransformations.Inhabitingthisresonatingsuprastructurewithmusicalintuitionandcreativeperceptionisplayinganexpressiveinstrument.

V.

Analysing and listeningThoseconcernedwiththeanalysisofelectroacousticmusichavetoconfrontthefactthatmostcompositionsfortapedonotprovideascore.39Analystsusu-allyresorttotheavailabletoolsfortherepresentationofsoundordevelopnewones,40seekingtoestablishmodelsthatmayhelptounderstandthedetailsandthelarge-scaleformofthecomposition.Methodsthatrelyonlisteninghavealsobeenproposed,likeNattiez’sAnalyse du Niveau Neutre(Roy2003,chapter6)thataims—basedontheperceptionofmusicalgesture—tosegmentaworkinmorphologicalunitswiththegoalofmakingatranscription.

“Hörverstehen heißt: Laute erkennen, Wissen aktivieren, Bekanntes mitUnbekanntemverknüpfen,dasGehörteinterpretieren”41(Solmecke1992,9).Inasense,listeningcomprehension(inwhichastudentoflanguagesengages)isanalogoustotheexperienceofmusicallistening,which,incloseagreementwiththepreviousquote,isdescribedbymusiccognitionintermsofselection,inter-pretationandstorage.ListeningscoreslikeGyörgyLigeti’sArtikulation(1958)orLucianoBerio’sThema—Omaggio a Joyce(1958)aimtoprovidethelistenerwithabridgetootherareasofcognition.Similarly,musicianshaveexercisedtheabil-ityofrelatingwhattheylistentowiththeirownmusicalexperience.Listeningisawaytocreate“inwardness”:interiorisingamusicalcompositionisaprocessinwhichlisteningandmemoryplayanimportantrole.42Performersalsorelyonlisteningasameanstocomparetheirexpectation(internallistening)tothesoundproduced,adjustingtheplayingtechniqueaccordinglyandcontinuously.Furthermore,liketheanalyst,theperformerisinterestedintheinternallevelof the music, understanding the score (perhaps using tools provided by thetheoretician)andmediatingthisunderstandingtothelistenerthroughperfor-mance.Performerscanalsobenefitfromobservingtheanalysts’useofwritinginordertobridgethegapleftbythescoreinelectroacousticmusic.Analysing

37 Hencetheimportanceofhavingrehearsalsintheconcertvenue. 38 Notnecessarilybringingthesystemintooscillation!Butmanyartists,fromTheWhotoAlvinLucier,

haveresortedtothisprinciple. 39 “Mostcompositionsfortapedonotcomewithascore.Thelackofawrittendocumentcreatesgreat

difficultiesforthemusicologist”(Risset2002,XV). 40 E.g.,Bayle’sacousmographe,ortheMusicalAnalysisandRepresentationSystem(MARS),http://dbis.

rwth-aachen.de/cms/projects/MARS(accesedMarch1,2011). 41 Listeningcomprehensionmeans:recognisingsounds,activatingknowledge,linkingwhatisfamiliar

withtheunkown,interpretingwhathasbeenheard.Author’stranslation. 42 Forinstance,HansTutschkuhasunderlinedthenecessityoflearningcompositionsbyheartforthe

soundprojectionofacousmaticmusic(Tutschku2001).



158

and listening are means of reflecting and developing interpretative criteria.Devisingperformancescoresisawaytokeeptrackofthoseideasandorganisetheirimplementationduringtheperformance.

A final attempt on two performance scoresFortheperformanceofLuigiNono’sLa fabbrica illuminata(1964)43forsopranoand four-channel tape44 I have put together a score-assembly combiningscreenshotsoftheamplitudeagainsttimerepresentationofthefourchannelsofthetape,sidebysidewiththepartforthesoprano.[Fig. 7]

ThewaveformviewisespeciallyconvenientinLa fabbrica illuminata becauseeachofthefourchannelsofthetape—basedonrecordingsofthreedifferentsoundsources(environmentalrecordingsmadeattheItalsider ironworks inGenova,thevoiceofsopranoCarlaHenius,andthechoiroftheRAI)—con-sistsofasequenceoftapecut-ups,ratherthanamixtureofdifferentlayersofsound.45Inmyscore,thesethreesourcesarerespectivelyidentifiedusingthefollowingconventions:environmentalnoisesareframedincolouredboxes,theutterancesandwordsofthesopranoaretranscribedastext,andthechoirpartsarefilledoutwithcut-outsofthecomposer’ssketches46usedfortherecordingsofthechoralparts(thelatternotseeninfigure7).Iregardputtingtogetherthis“waveform-score”aspartof theexerciseofmemorisingthetapeandunder-standingthewaysoundmaterialsaredeployed,47leadingtothedefinitionofcriteriaanddevelopmentofperformancestrategies.Foregroundguidelinesfortheperformancecouldbetheconsiderationoftherelationshipbetweenthetapeandthevoice,theoverallfaderstrategiesinaccordancewiththetempera-mentsofeachsection,ortheworkingoutofthetextualrelations—bothwithinthedifferentchannelsofthetapeandbetweentapeandsinger(e.g.,recordedvoicesthatmayactasechoesofthelivepartinthesoprano).

Figure8isanexamplethatrevealsmyparticularinterestintheelaborationoftheverysoftcanti intimiofthetapesoloin“Girodelletto”,circumscribedbytimerindicationsthathelptoguidethefadermovementsthroughthenar-rowsignal-to-noiseratioofthispart.Thenumeralsinpencil[Fig. 8]correspondtodynamicvaluesforthecalibrationofthefaders.Ingeneral,thosenumbersrepresenttendenciesaroundwhichfaderactivityshouldgravitateinacertainpassage,buttheymayalsoserveasanaidinshapingmoredetaileddynamiccontours.Suchannotationsaresubjecttocontinuousrevisionduringrehears-als,andalthoughtheyprovidearelativeindicationoflevel,etc.,theyhavetobereconsideredforeachperformance.

43 ForthecircumstancessurroundingtheconceptionofthisworkseeHenius1999,9–24,andNono1967[1975],105–106.

44 Thetapewascreatedinthe“StudiodiFonologiadiMilanodellaRAI”underthesupervisionofMarinoZuccheri(Henius1999,21).

45 CarlaHeniusprovidesinterestingdetailsoftheproductionofthetapeinhernotes(Henius1999). 46 BorrowedfromdifferentsourceslikeSpangemacher(1981,31,33,and37). 47 Connectingthescore-assemblywithsomeoftheexistinganalysisofthiswork(Riede1986,30–47;

Spangemacher1981,27–44)providesavaluablesupportforunderstandingNono’suseofthethreesoundsourcesasstructuralandmetaphoricaldevices(e.g.,theprotestingcrowdsinthebeginninggiv-ingwayinthesecondchoraletofactorynoisesthatprogressivelydevelopuntilcompletelydominatingthehumanvoicesattheendofthefirstpart).



Figure 7. A detail of the performer’s score-assembly for the sound projection of Luigi Nono’s La fabbrica illuminata (1964). Ricordi.

Figure 8. La fabbrica illuminata. A detail of the performer’s score with annotations.

Fig.7

Fig.8


Fig.11

Figure 9. Schematic diagram of the spatial movements in Karlheinz Stockhausen’s Cosmic Pulses (2007), from an unpublished analysis by the author.

Figure 10. The performer’s worksheet with the melodic layers expanded as 24*8 = 192 tracks.

Figure 11. The performer, during an open rehearsal of Cosmic Pulses. (Photograph courte-sy of Rita Torres.)

Fig.10

Fig.9



161

In the case of Stockhausen’s electronic work Cosmic Pulses (2007), foreight-channeltape,acomparableapproachisoutofquestionduetothephe-nomenallydensesuperpositionofmelodiclayers.48InthisworkIrefertothecomposer’sformscheme49andmyownanalysesofthespatialmovements[Fig. 9]forplanningtheperformance.Withoutgoingintodetail,Ifinditpracticaltoorganisetheworkintothreemajorblocks:theopeningsection,withthepres-entation and successive layering of the 24 loops (until 00:15:20); the middlesection(from00:15:20to00:24:00),prioritisingtheinteractionwiththepro-jection space and balancing the three groups of eight layers; and finally, thesimplificationofthistexture(from00:24:00totheend),concentratingintheresolutionoftensionandindulginginthespatialaccelerandithatfinishupeachofthemelodicloops.Thescoredevisedforthispurposeisalargeformatprint-outofthe24melodiclayers.[Fig. 10]Thistemplatethenservesasaworksheetforhighlightingsalientfeatures,timecodecuesandothermarkingstakendownduringtherehearsals.[Fig. 11]

48 Twenty-fourmelodicloopsaresuccessivelylayeredontopofeachother,rotatingaccordingto241trajectoriesatdifferenttempi(Stockhausen2007b).

49 Seepp.7–8oftheCD-booklet(Stockhausen2007b).



162

references

Bayle,François.1992.“DieRaumodyssee.”Sonderton ’92. Elektroakustik und Raum,editedbyKarlheinzEssl,NorbertSchweizer,andKlausHollinetz,12–21.Linz:OffenesKulturhaus.Originallypublishedas“L’Odysséedel’espace,”L’Espace du Son,1988.

Bayle,François.2007.Komposition und Musikwisssenschaft im Dialog IV (2000–2003)editedbyCristophvonBlumröder.Berlin:LitVerlag.

Bayle,François.2008.“Space,andmore.”Organised Sound13(1):241–249.

Benson,BruceE.2003.The Improvisation of Musical Dialogue. A Phenomenology of Music.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Bernardini,Nicola,andAlviseVidolin.2005.“SustainableLiveElectro-AcousticMusic.”Availableathttp://www.aimi-musica.org/files/Bernardini-Vidolin-SMC05-0.8-FINAL.pdf(accessedAugust1,2011).

Brech,Martha.2007.“BrauchtmanEditionenelektroakustischerMusik?”InMusikalische Analyse und Editionsphilologie,editedbyFriederikeWißman,ThomasAhrendandHeinzvonLoesch,483–488.Wiesbaden:Breitkopf&Härtel.

Burns,Christopher.2001.“RealizingLucierandStockhausen:casestudiesintheperformancepracticeofelectroacousticmusic.”InProceedings of the International Computer Music Conference2001,40–43.AnnArbor,MI:MPublishing,UniversityofMichiganLibrary.

Cage,John,ed.1969.Notations.NewYork:SomethingElsePress.Alsoavailableathttp://ubu.wfmu.org/text(accessedJanuary23,2012).

Dahlhaus,Carl.1965.“Notenschriftheute.”Darmstädter Beiträge zur Neuen Musik,vol.9,9–34.Paris:Schott.

Eco,Umberto.1964[1982].Apocalicciti e integrati.3rded.Milan:Bompiani.

Eimert,Herbert.1954.“ZurMusikalischenSituation.”Technische Hausmitteilungn des Nordwestdeutschen Rundfunksvol.6(1/2):42–46.

Eimert,Herbert.1955.“DiesiebenStücke.”Die Reihe1:8–13.

Eimert,Herbert,FritzEnkelandKarlheinzStockhausen.1954.“FragenderNotationelektronischerMusik.”Technische Hausmitteilungn des Nordwestdeutschen

Rundfunks,vol.6(1/2):52–54.Emmerson,Simon.2007.Living Electronic

Music.Hampshire:Ashgate.GarcíaKarman,Gregorio.2006.“Una

propuestaparalarestauraciónelectrónicadePlanto por las víctimas de la violencia.”PaperpresentedatI Congreso Internacional de Música y Nuevas Tecnologías Contemporáneas,UniversityofSevilla.

Goeyvaerts,Karel.1955.“DaselektronischeKlangmaterial.”Die Reihe1:14–16.

Haller,HansPeter.1991.“Klang-undZeitrauminderMusikNonos.”Die Musik Luigi Nonos,35–49.EditedbyOttoKolleritsch.Vienna:UniversalEdition.

Halffter,Cristóbal.1971.Planto por las víctimas de la violencia.Vienna:UniversalEdition.

Halffter,Cristóbal.1976–77.Variaciones sobre la resonancia de un grito.Vienna:UniversalEdition.

Harrison,JohtyandWilson,Scott,editors.2010.“Sound—Space:Newapproachestomultichannelmusicandaudio.”Organised Sound15(3).

Henius,Carla.1999.“TagebuchnotitzenzurEntstehungvonLuigiNonosLa fabbrica Iluminatta.”InLuigi Nono. Aufbruch in Grenzebereiche,editedbyThomasSchäfer,9–24.Saarbrücken:PFAU.

INA/GRM.2004.Archives GRM.5CDs.InstitutNationaldel’Audiovisuel.

IRCAM.2007.Journées professionnelles sur le métier de réalisateur en informatique musicale.Professionalmeeting.Paris:IRCAM,SalleIgor-Stravinsky,22–23June.

Kagel,Mauricio.1965.“Komposition—Notation—Interpretation.”Darmstädter Beiträge zur Neuen Musik,vol.9,55–63.Paris:Schott.

Kassel,Matthias.1994.“DerKlangregisseuralsMusiker.AspektemusikalischerInterpretationdurchEchtzeitsteuerunginderAufführunglive-elektronischerWerke.”Magisterarbeit,Albert-Lüdwigs-UniversitätzuFreiburgI.Br.

Kientzy,Daniel.2003[2009].“Lainterpretaciónórgano-acusmática,unametacameralidad.Lanuevamúsicadecámara.”TranslatedbyReinaPortuondo.Arte, ciencia y tecnología4:4–6.Availableat<http://www.fundestellos.org/ACT4.pdf>OriginallyappearedinLes cahiers de l’ACME213.



163

Kishino,Malika.2009.Lebensfunke II.Milan:EdizioniSuviniZerboni.

Lombardi,Daniele.1980.Scrittura e suono. La notazzione nella musica contemporeanea.Rome:Edipan.

López,Jimmy.2009.Íncubus III.Texas:FilarmonikaLCC.

Manning,Peter.1993.Electronic and Computer Music.Oxford:ClarendonPress.

Messiaen,Olivier.2004.Timbres—Dureés.(1952).InINA/GRM.CD1(12).Archives GRM.InstitutNationaldel’Audiovisuel,5CDs.

Moles,Abraham.1960.Les musiques expérimentales.Paris:ÉditionsduCercled’ArtContemporain.

Nelson,PeterandStephenMontague,editors.1991.“LiveElectronics”.Contemporary Music Review6(1).

Nono,Luigi.[1967]1975.“DerMusikerinderFabrik.”InLuigi Nono: Texte: Studien zu seiner Musik,editedbyJürgStenzl,104–106.Zürich:Atlantis.

Nono,Luigi.1964[2008].La fabbrica illuminata.Milan:Ricordi.

Nono,Luigi.1987[1992].Post-prae-ludium.Milan:Ricordi.

Penycook,Bruce.2008.“WhowillturntheknobswhenIdie?”Organised Sound13(3):199–208.

Puckette,Miller.2001.“NewPublic-DomainRealizationsofStandardPiecesforInstrumentsandLiveElectronics.”InProceedings of the International Computer Music Conference 2001,377–380.AnnArbor,MI:MPublishing,UniversityofMichiganLibrary.

Richard,André.1993.“Musicafuoridalleconvenzionienotazionegraficatradizionale:limitidellatransmissionedellamusicadiLuigiNono.”InCon Luigi Nono(Catalogueofthe1992VeniceBiennale),97–103.Milan:Ricordi.

Risset,JeanClaude.2002.ForewordtoElectroacoustic Music: Analytical Perspectives,editedbyThomasLicata.Westport,CT:GreenwoodPress.

Rizzardi,Veniero.1999.“Notation,oraltraditionandperformancepracticeintheworkswithtapeandliveelectronicsbyLuigiNono.”Contemporary Music Review18(1):47–56.

Riede,Bernd.1986.Luigi Nonos Kompositionen mit Tonband.Munich:MusikverlagEmilKatzblicher.

Roy,Stéphane.2003.L’analyse des musiques électroacoustiques: Modèles et propositions.Paris:L’Harmattan.

Sabbe,Herman.1981.“HerrFurtwänglervonMorgen.”InMusik-Konzepte19: Karlheinz Stockhausen,editedbyHeinz-KlausMetzgerandRainerRiehn,49–52.Munich:editiontext+kritik.

Smalley,Denis.2007.“Space-formandtheacousmaticimage.”Organised Sound12(1):35–38.

Smalley,Denis.1991.“SpatialExperienceinElectro-acousticMusic.”LIEN Revue d’Esthethique Musicale: L’Espace du Son2:123–126.

Solmecke,Gert,editor.1992.“Hörverstehen.”Fremdsprache Deutsch7.Munich:KlettEditionDeutsch.Availableathttp://www.uni-kassel.de/fb2/daf/docs/Artikel_hoeren.pdf(accessedAugust12,2011).

Spangemacher,Friederich.1981.“FabbricaillumiataoderFabbricaillustrata?”InMusik-Konzepte 20: Luigi Nono,editedbyHeinz-KlausMetzgerandRainerRiehn,27–44.Munich:editiontext+kritik.

Spangemacher,Friederich.2006.“DialektischerKontrapunkt.DieelektronischenKompositionenLugiNonoszwischen1964und1971.”Saarbrücken:PFAU-Verlag.Firstpublished1983byBosse-Verlag.

Stockhausen,Karlheinz.1954[1956].Studie II.London:UniversalEdition.

Stockhausen,Karlheinz.1959[1963].“MusikundGraphik.”InTexte zur elektronischen und instrumentalen Musik,vol.1,editedbyDieterSchnebel,176–188.Cologne:DuMont.OriginallypublishedinDarmstädter Beiträge zur Neuen Musik,vol.3.Mainz:Schott,1960.

Stockhausen,Karlheinz.1964a[1974a].Mikrophonie I, No. 15.London:UniversalEdition.

Stockhausen,Karlheinz.1964b[1974b].Mixtur, No. 16.London:UniversalEdition.

Stockhausen,Karlheinz.2003[2007a].Mixtur 2003, No. 16 2/3.Kürten:Stockhausen-Verlag.

Stockhausen,Karlheinz.2007b.Cosmic Pulses: Thirteenth hour from KLANG.Kürten:Stockhausen-Verlag,CD91,compactdisc.

Straebel,Volker.2009.“TheProjectforMagneticTape(1952/53):ChallengingtheIdeaofaCriticalEditionofHistoric



164

MusicforRecordingMedia.”UnpublishedpaperreadatMusic: Notation and Sound,jointconferenceoftheInternationalAssociationofMusicLibrariesandtheInternationalMusicologicalSociety.Amsterdam,10July.

Tutschku,Hans.2001.“OntheInterpretationofmulti-channelElectroacousticWorksonLoudspeaker-Orchestras:somethoughtsontheGRM-AcousmoniumandBeast.”TranslatedbyGeorgeGoodman.Availableathttp://www.tutschku.com/content/interpretation.en.php(accessedApril1,2011).

VandeGorne,Annette.2002.“L’interprétationspatiale.Essaideformalisationméthodologique.”Revue Déméter,2002.Availableathttp://demeter.revue.univ-lille3.fr/interpretation/vandegorne.pdf(accessedOctober3,2011).

Wetzel,David.2007.“Amodelfortheconservationofinteractiveelectroacousticrepertoire:analysis,reconstruction,andperformanceinthefaceoftechnologicalobsolescence.”Organised Sound11(3):273–284.


reprint from sound and score - isbn 978 90 5867 976 5 - ©...

Documents