The importance of the phrase in complex music.

So I keep kicking the can down the street here holding off on a video post about the new piece I am working on. SO! On with another kick, on the plus this punt was in fact inspired by the new work.

So, imagine if you would getting a new shiny piece of music, something with no recording so there you are finding things outs from the beginning. This just happens to be one of my favorite situations, it's a rare treat to find, or get a piece that you have no preconceived idea of how it is going to go. This could be Mozart, Bach, or anything, face it, it's exciting and a chance to really flex those interpertational muscles. I think this is something I have written about before... maybe... if not here is my quick 101.

• Everything you know is contextual. That being said if you are looking at Beethoven 3 you should come at it from his earlier string and piano music, and his first two symphonies. This is something I believe, we have performance tradition, and performance practices and they are different things. The best performances capture the composer not the period, what I mean by that is when we look at Mozart we tend to do so as a figure in time that somehow transcends an era of music and not the actual linear output of his work. 

• Make decisions, and know why. For me saying well so and so does it this way so I am, is not a real answer, it's uninformed and parroting. If you like something someone does and you can dissect and understand why they made that decision and in turn you yourself agree with that, then power to you.

• Always think big picture, and try to figure out how everything relates, Find internal consistencies. Internal consistencies is a phrase I use a great deal, because I think it is a big thing, especially with music from the new complexity and things that are not as intuitive to the western ear of music. 

• If you don't understand it, the audience never will. This is another big things that I learned, it was focused on form for me. The lesson was if you play a Sonata, or a piece in any form. If you have not made the formal decisions and taken time to understand it there will be no way to convey it. 

I realize these are not "unique" to new music, and for all purposes for myself I found these strategies in music from the standard canon. The challenge that appears in more complex music, especially for music that falls further outside the standard canon is that we get can get in a highly technical mindset and need to actively step back and see the big picture beyond the technical demands.

"Faking" it

So the title of this post is misleading, sorry, but that is just what it is. This post will be back about my learning process and Nebadon, and what I am doing with this work. Though it is worth noting that this is one of my big concept things I feel strongly about, especially towards new music. For now, let's jump back on starship Stockhausen and depart for Nebadon (nerd alert).

One thing I truly respect about Stockhausen's music is by and large it is rather quite playable, that is not saying it is easy, it is actually rather difficult. It is full of little things that at first look simple but turn out to be either complex or downright ludicrous, be it in it's coordination, execution, or simply playing it with a beautiful sound. I will put two examples of this on here.

So above are those two examples. There is nothing really complicated about the patterns, they present some challenges, but again, nothing to lose that much sleep over. (Ignore my markings since that is some analysis and such that I have talked in brief about before). So back to the challenges that exist in these examples. With the first example, the challenge is can you make a nice clean shift between open and stopped, maintain pitch, while entering delicately on a higher pitch. BUT, the priority here should be can you do it with the singing sound that you would use in Brahms, or Schubert.

Example number two, the challenge is facility in the low range, clarity, a good trill, and a resonant sound. This is good enough for a sub par version of this lick (which appears in various permutations throughout the entire work (over 20 minutes!!) It is a tricky little lick, but executing it has to be a guarantee, not a good enough.), what I am truly striving for is can I make a "majestic" or "interesting" musical line out of the material, in such a way that nobody notices this slightly unidiomatic horn lick.

Since Stockhausen writes music that is very playable I am going to pull an example from another work I am preparing that is more towards the... "are you kidding me? I'm not a bass clarinet" kind of lick." Which will help me make my bigger picture point.

As you can see, this is a little further away idiomatically from something horn players are used to seeing. (The work is full of this, and it grows in complexity, and each permutation you get LESS variance in what pitches you need to draw attention towards.) So this is the kind of lick my title was referring to, Faking it. Anyone who knows me knows that when I hear someone say "I can just fake that" is akin to nails on a chalkboard. So I think I will take  moment to explain that, and as well relate it back to Stockhausen, and Sirus (dork) in general. 

If you have ever been to a new music concert, you have heard (and probably in great supply) faking. Otherwise known as, kind of making the gesture. Now, some of you have probably made it to see a concert of new music that seemed to be so insanely good there must have been some witchcraft going on. Well, there was no witchcraft, you probably heard someone(s) who had spent countless hours getting it AS CLOSE to the ink as possible (while keeping a wonderful, intune, captivating sound, that is full of musical gesture). If you imagine playing Beethoven and the player beside you is "faking" it, you would know they were not up to par, and that person would most likely not be in that chair next concert. Could you imagine a concert of Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra with a string section full of faking it (you probably can...). When you compare those to performances where they "nailed it" why would you ever buy the other product.

As a performer I feel obligated to make sure I can play the music as well as I can. If that means I have to woodshed a lick up until the day of the concert that is what I will do, I can't personally accept "faking" it as an answer for any kind of music. So back to Nebadon, I am focusing on always having this wonderful sound that is full of colour and intrigue. My sound model is the same that I would use playing Cello Suites (in C) on horn. If someone froze time on a single note, I wouldn't want them to think that I was playing some strange modern music (or isn't good...). I would want them to be able to say what a great resonate note, he must be playing some Schubert. (Then when time resumes they would be in for a treat)

 This isn't a problem unique to new music but it seems to be a slightly more accepted practice for one reason or another.

What is in a performance Part 2

So this time around I felt like talking a bit more in detail about the nature of programming this style of music.

I wrote this awhile back and never published it anywhere, but I think it will find its home in this series of posts I am working on. (So if the voice is a little strange I was writing for a less casual posting.. so I had my serious pants on that day)

As someone who is active in new music I am always facing certain challenges that are not as present when programming from the conventional cannon. These challenges can be seen as opportunity for an immersive experience for the audience, if thoughtfully planned.

One challenge is that of the perceived expectation of new music. Robert Blumen talked about at great length in his article “Why do we hate modern classical music”, I won’t get into this article since I don’t think I could keep it brief, at all (though if you want to raise your blood pressure, go give it a read, and try to be polite. This article also highlights how the terminology we use can be harmful. I hate using the phrase "modern classical music, or anything close. This music has it's own genre, there is no need to try to borrow from another. Rant over). What he does bring to the front though, is that people expect modern music to sound like “car crash” music. I assume those reading this are well aware this is not the case, nor is this an opinion that I share in the least. There is a tremendous amount of great music out there and some of that “car crash” music he speaks about is some of the greatest in the cannon. This creates a unique for us, especially as performers that is: how on earth will we get this music out in a way that is going to be meaningful.

One of the most used (read: abused) tactics I have seen is referred to as “The hostage program”. This is where you program a monumental, popular, and a largely accepted work at the end of a program, or have it share the first half of the bill. This is done largely so people don’t have the chance to show up at intermission to hear only their favorites. While we are going down that road while you are at it scrap the intermission, now people are there to stay (I have seen this done, and it usually ends with a very fidgety upset audience). This hostage method works to some degree as you do create exposure for the audience this is largely due to the “rules” of concert halls related to seating. If you want to hear Brahms, you have to hear Mason Bates, or R Murray Schaffer.

Last year I programmed a recital with Turnarounds for amplified horn and tape, Spiegel im Spiegel, Deanimator for horn and electronics, and finishing with The Reinecke B-flat trio for horn, clarinet, and piano. Though, while programming this I fell a new way that I could approach programing. The intermission in the afore mentioned program came AFTER Deanimator which left me to figure out how do I program the first half, and to do so in a way that people leave with a great experience. A major problem/opportunity with electronic music (in programming in my opinion) is how quickly it can cause tension, emotional highs and lows, angst, relief, etc. When the recital was in its infancy there were two works that were going to be there no matter what, Turnarounds, and Deanimator. Two things these works do (both fantastic works) is taking the audience through highs and lows at a rapid pace in ways that can be overwhelming the listener. When I realized this I figured I needed to find a piece that would bring the listener back to a calm, and relaxed state. As well they needed to be ready and receptive to the experience the next work.

The answer came to me in Arvo Pärt’s Spiegel im Spiegel, now as a horn player, attempting the Pärt was, perhaps, the most challenging undertaking I could think of at the time. Which was daunting, and more than once I considered my mortality, and thought to myself there had to be another way. Though, I could never seem to find one that would work as well as the Pärt. So as a performer I faced the challenge. In the end the response from the programming of the first half from the audience was great, they didn’t care there was a “masterpiece of the repertoire” coming after the intermission. The first half was so successful as a whole it simply worked and didn’t need the “treat for the audience” of the Reinecke.

From all this I learned a major lesson in programming new music, if we want the music to become more popular, appreciated, and accepted it has to come from the performer and programming. As well as through very meaningful execution of the music since we have something that the standard cannon doesn’t have as much of, the importance of the live performance. New music is such an immersive experience which simply can’t be replicated at home in a pair of headphones. Seize the power of that and go forth and program. 

Moving forward, and why deadlines matter for me.

I have my first real deadline for the project and it falls at the end of January. This will be the first time I will work with someone on Nebadon, which I am excited about. The importance of this, and why from a week of work I chose to write about this is as follows. Having this deadline forces me to conceptualize the work in a complete manner. This is because the person I am working with KNOWS their stuff, and for me to stand on my own two feet I need to do certain things to prepare.

1. Score study
2. Recording Study
3. Large scale and small scale analysis
4. I need read much much more about Stockhausen, his music and, the practices around its performance. (So if anyone who reads this knows about articles or such, send them my way)

Reflecting back now that I have started playing the work is how important the first three steps really are. The electronic part to Nebadon is really interesting and very complex, and the horn part takes turns playing the same material or slight variations of it. As the piece progresses the voices pull apart material wise, this fact became something I focused on in detail this last week while trying to find ways to replicate the effect of the electronics on horn. As well, this kind of interaction will play a vital role in the large scale structure of the work.

The final step is something that was stressed by conductors during my graduate work at DePaul, and I am always very happy it was. The more we can get inside the heads of the composer and environment (culturally, socially, etc.) the more we are able to find details that would otherwise be glossed over. (Next time you listen to a Viennese octet really try to find the humour in it which is always fantastic since it happens in such interesting ways).

I have some other exciting projects coming up as well! Grisey’s – Accords Perdus, Globokar’s Dos a Dos, and more!