Avant garde music

[Bryn]

Exactly. I think that many people whose listening experience is centred on notated music have a somewhat underdeveloped idea of what "the improvisational method of composition" is capable of. I recall an occasion when, after giving a performance that was freely improvised (in a trio one of whose members I'd never even heard play before the performance), an audience member came up and intended to be complimentary by remarking that the performance "sounded composed", to which my answer was "well actually it was composed, just using a different method to what you're used to". . . .

Not something which you and Eddie Prévost or, indeed, Cardew would be likely to agree upon, what?

[Joseph K]

But, again, is it really possible in principle to say whether something sounds spontaneous or not?

But do you think something like Interstellar Space could be created through solely notational means though?

There may not be a binary opposition, but there must be a difference between the two approaches...

[Pulcinella]

But, again, is it really possible in principle to say whether something sounds spontaneous or not? Some of Messiaen's organ compositions are based closely on his improvisations. Is it possible to know by hearing them which ones these are? I would say not. Is there really a binary opposition between "spontaneous" and "contrived"?

I've usually thought (but maybe too cynically) that those organists (some renowned for 'improvisation') who ask audience members for a 'theme' will have already worked out what they're going to play, and then somehow 'contrive' to engineer the theme into their 'ramblings'.

But I take your point: maybe there's a Venn diagram overlap rather than a binary opposition!

[RichardB]

Not something which you and Eddie Prévost or, indeed, Cardew would be likely to agree upon, what?

I don't know about that, it's just a matter of what kind of terminology is found most useful for individual purposes. I find it most appropriate to begin from the standpoint that "composition" denotes creating music in general, and "improvisation" is one among many methods that can be used to do it. (This way of looking at things comes from Evan Parker originally.) Eddie would draw those lines in different places, but that's mainly because of his experience various examples of composers having people improvise and then calling the result "their" composition, something that was particularly prevalent in the 1960s. He and I have spoken about this. I think it's important to credit people's creative input and to bear in mind that "composition" isn't only something done by a single person, or only something done outside the time of performance, but that there are many other possibilities.

[RichardB]

But do you think something like Interstellar Space could be created through solely notational means though?

No, and nor could Carter's Concerto for Orchestra have been improvised, but I'm talking about in principle whether it's possible to listen to any randomly chosen piece of music and know how much if any of it was spontaneously created. Just like there are some compositions which given you the impression they were composed using serial techniques, but they might not be, whereas others might sound as if they weren't but are. Personally I prefer to listen to what's happening rather than to speculate about his it was made to happen. If I start concentrating on how the music was made it probably isn't holding my attention sufficiently!

[Bryn]

I don't know about that, it's just a matter of what kind of terminology is found most useful for individual purposes. I find it most appropriate to begin from the standpoint that "composition" denotes creating music in general, and "improvisation" is one among many methods that can be used to do it. (This way of looking at things comes from Evan Parker originally.) Eddie would draw those lines in different places, but that's mainly because of his experience various examples of composers having people improvise and then calling the result "their" composition, something that was particularly prevalent in the 1960s. He and I have spoken about this. I think it's important to credit people's creative input and to bear in mind that "composition" isn't only something done by a single person, or only something done outside the time of performance, but that there are many other possibilities.

Fair points. Your final sentence relates closely to N. O. Moore's view of improvisation as "social composition".

[Mandryka]

What does it mean for something to "sound improvised"?

Don’t you talk about this in your book somewhere?


Some random thoughts, made without having read the above discussion

1. Lots of obvious planning - thinks like orchestral fugues, the last movement of The Jupiter Symphony. Not a chance that anyone could think it’s improvised.

2. Yes, there are composed pieces which are designed to sound improvised. Toccatas. They may be just notated improvisations, like in Scelsi.

3. Size. Could a symphony orchestra improvise? Really? I’d quite like to see the score of that Takemitsu piece to see what’s actually being asked for in terms of improvisation. And I think there was something by Oliveros which asked for orchestral improvisation - Sound Geometries - in some sense. Devil’s int detail.

4. Could you improvise a sonata - with whole expositions repeated verbatim and then repeated again with some variation?
I think not,


5. Hardly any “classical music” of any significance is improvisable - too much complicated structure in great “classical music” You couldn’t improvise a Josquin Mass, or The Hammerklavier Sonata. The only improvisable “classical music” is trivial and small. (And before anyone says it, there’s no the ricercare a 3 in the published Opfer was improvised on that fateful day.) You can hear whether the music is not improvised by its quality - improvised “classical music” just sounds like second rate classical music. Improvisations can be great music, maybe, just different qualities from great classical music.

6. I think I can hear that the people playing that Takemitsu are on the rails, it’s just obvious!

[RichardB]

Don’t you talk about this in your book somewhere?

It's touched upon in several places in fact.

there are composed pieces which are designed to sound improvised. Toccatas.

But, as you say, they're usually based on improvisation.

I’d quite like to see the score of that Takemitsu piece to see what’s actually being asked for in terms of improvisation.

Not very much, as I said, and only in the percussion parts, and only within quite strict limits.

You can hear whether the music is not improvised by its quality

This is precisely the attitude inherited from "classical" music that doesn't hold in many more recent musics. When the music takes place within a framework that depends on the kind of coordination (and a single composing intelligence) that occurs in for example the Mozart fugal finale you mention, then obviously improvisation is out of the question. When the music doesn't depend on a preexistent framework at all, this isn't the case, and the creative intelligence producing the music can be distributed more widely around the performing participants. Most notated composition that involves improvisation takes the notated score as the fundamental paradigm and opens up spaces within it to be "completed" by performers, but it's also possible to imagine a music where free improvisation is the fundamental paradigm and the notated component forms points of confluence and coordination within it, as well as other types of combination. When I say that in principle it isn't possible to determine whether some given music is or isn't improvised, I'm not trying to claim that this is the case for the most or even much music, especially when you're familiar with its idiom. It's precisely the borderline cases that I find most interesting as a new way to think about music, as in Anthony Braxton's "Ghost Trance Music" compositions.

[Mandryka]

It's touched upon in several places in fact. But, as you say, they're usually based on improvisation. Not very much, as I said, and only in the percussion parts, and only within quite strict limits. This is precisely the attitude inherited from "classical" music that doesn't hold in many more recent musics. When the music takes place within a framework that depends on the kind of coordination (and a single composing intelligence) that occurs in for example the Mozart fugal finale you mention, then obviously improvisation is out of the question. When the music doesn't depend on a preexistent framework at all, this isn't the case, and the creative intelligence producing the music can be distributed more widely around the performing participants. Most notated composition that involves improvisation takes the notated score as the fundamental paradigm and opens up spaces within it to be "completed" by performers, but it's also possible to imagine a music where free improvisation is the fundamental paradigm and the notated component forms points of confluence and coordination within it, as well as other types of combination. When I say that in principle it isn't possible to determine whether some given music is or isn't improvised, I'm not trying to claim that this is the case for the most or even much music, especially when you're familiar with its idiom. It's precisely the borderline cases that I find most interesting as a new way to think about music, as in Anthony Braxton's "Ghost Trance Music" compositions.

All of this sounds absolutely correct to me.

I've got a recording by "The Syntactical Ghost Trance Choir" of Composition 256 and other things integrated in some way -- I've never seen a Braxton "score" but I'm assuming that there are passages of more or less clear directions and passages which are more open or ambiguous or even just suggestive. I like it very much -- I think it's tremendous in fact. This

https://newbraxtonhouse.bandcamp.com/album/syntactical-gtm-choir-nyc-2011

Just reading that bandcamp page (maybe for the first time) that "Composition No.256 by Anthony Braxton, a Ghost Trance piece, which can be heard at the beginning and the end of the performance." -- the beginning sounds particularly unimprovised to me! It's always hard for an outsider to know what's going on in Braxton's music - arcane stuff!

[Bryn]

Back in 1982, a three-day "Cage at 70" weekend was held in Islington, with Cage in attendance. An early performance during that weekend was of Cardew's Treatise, played by AMM (on that occasion, Eddie Prevost, Keith Rowe, and John Tilbury). After the performance, Cage expressed the view that he did not generally like improvisation but found this (which he appeared to think was an improvisation) very much to his liking. Treatise is a graphic score, not an improvisation but a composition, originally published without any form of instruction as to how to perform it. Later, Cardew produced the Treatise Handbook which included two different realisations in standard musical notation: Bun Number 2 and Volo Solo. The former scored for large ensemble, the latter for solo piano. Given that AMM is principally, indeed overwhelmingly, associated with free improvisation, perhaps Cage's misunderstanding was understandable, on this occasion but it did serve to illustrate that the dividing line between composition and improvisation is somewhat blurred.

https://www.boosey.com/shop/prod/Cardew-Cornelius-Treatise-Handbook/632875

https://www.editionpeters.com/product/treatise/ep7560

[smittims]

I was once lucky to see and hear Braxton play in Manchester, and I still treasure my LP of his 'Creative orchestra music'.

Another LP, which sadly went the way of all flesh , was a 1960s CBS disc of Leonard Bernstein conducting what was then called 'avant-garde music'. It included three improvisations by the New York Philharmonic, just a few minutes each. Listening , though, I felt sure Bernstein had told them roughly when and what to play. It sounded as if some preparation had been done.

[RichardB]

I felt sure Bernstein had told them roughly when and what to play. It sounded as if some preparation had been done.

No sh*t, Sherlock! From Allen Shawn's book on Bernstein:

he demonstrated what it was like to have the entire orchestra improvise following a few prearranged signals. (One suspects, from the variety of instrumental colors and techniques of playing heard in this and several other engaging group improvisations later recorded by the Philharmonic, that there were more “prearranged signals” in operation than the conductor let on.)

Obviously some pitches and rhythms were written down, as well as various looser indications, and the style of the whole seems very much in line with Bernstein's own musical preferences. The Feldman composition Out of Last Pieces on the same record involves considerably more "freedom" for the players, I think.

[Bryn]

Re #55, here's a heavily data-compressed Youtube offering of an AMM album with both improvisation and a composition. The "'84" was appended to "Treatise" essentially for copyright reasons. The lack of open attribution to Cardew was for similar reasons. Can you tell the difference in music-making? Treatise '84 starts about 44 and a half minutes in.

[Mandryka]

A post of random and inarticulate thoughts

In the book, Richard mentions Malcolm Goldstein's violin improvisations -- like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxo_lUSRIuY&ab_channel=MusiqueRayonnante

and Irvin Arditti's violin performances of compositions -- like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fF03WJSgIuE&ab_channel=aldolombera

He asks whether the difference -- the difference between improvisation and composition -- is something you can hear.

In the blurb to the Goldstein, there's this claim about the improvisation:

Melodies of sound (timbre/texture/articulation) are created that evolve out of the interplay between the resonance of the violin and the gesture of the violinist.


Is that audible? Is there the same type of relation in Arditti's performance.

(By the way, writing this it occurred to me that Radigue's Occam series -- composed (in some sense, I'm not clear how composed they are) with a specific composer and instrument in mind -- is maybe "about" the interplay between the resonance of the instrument and the gesture of the performer. Maybe the Lombera piece that Arditti plays was written with Arditti's violin in mind.)

[RichardB]

A post of random and inarticulate thoughts

In the book, Richard mentions Malcolm Goldstein's violin improvisations -- like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxo_lUSRIuY&ab_channel=MusiqueRayonnante

and Irvin Arditti's violin performances of compositions -- like this

Not actually "like that", what I was thinking of was something more like Cage's Freeman Etudes - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s23S...yBDKuw&index=2