Minimalism surveyed - 4.6.2011

[Boilk]

What [Reich] thought interesting, as he maintained concentration, were the interesting rhythmic patterns resulting in passing from phasing, and how a cyclic process could take place in which the original pattern eventually returned, and could mark the conclusion of the piece. To cut a long story short he then tried replicating this in real time with real performers, discovering that by means of intense concentration it was possible for musicians to accelerate or slow down said materials, replicating this phasing.

The idea of different cycles shifting in and out of phase had, of course, already been explored America. I'm sure this was employed in certain works of Cowell and Hovhaness in particular, the latter calling the different cycles "orbits". Neither did this with tape, that I know of.

There may have been a precedent too with Colin McPhee, although he leaned somewhat on near-transcription.

[Bryn]

The idea of different cycles shifting in and out of phase had, of course, already been explored America. I'm sure this was employed in certain works of Cowell and Hovhaness in particular, the latter calling the different cycles "orbits". Neither did this with tape, that I know of.

There may have been a precedent too with Colin McPhee, although he leaned somewhat on near-transcription.

I'm familiar with this argument, but have yet to be convinced that is is anything other than a kind of 'sour grapes'. Who, pray, before Reich, explored slowly changing phase relationships through a series of canonic steps until the phrase(s) being shifted against each other completed full cycles? Riley's In C has previously been cited, but there, any phase shifting is an accident on performance, not something derived from following the score as composed. Indeed, I can recall be reprimanded (though, admittedly not by Riley but by Cardew) as deviant for suggesting 'bending' the rules and playing a fraction of a beat out of synch with others, though maintaining the same tempo as they. Do please offer a convincing example of what Reich refers to as his phase technique which pre-dates his use of it (in either tape or directly performed composition).

[MrGongGong]

I'm familiar with this argument, but have yet to be convinced that is is anything other than a kind of 'sour grapes'. Who, pray, before Reich, explored slowly changing phase relationships through a series of canonic steps until the phrase(s) being shifted against each other completed full cycles? Riley's In C has previously been cited, but there, any phase shifting is an accident on performance, not something derived from following the score as composed. Indeed, I can recall be reprimanded (though, admittedly not by Riley but by Cardew) as deviant for suggesting 'bending' the rules and playing a fraction of a beat out of synch with others, though maintaining the same tempo as they. Do please offer a convincing example of what Reich refers to as his phase technique which pre-dates his use of it (in either tape or directly performed composition).

indeed
I find it hard to think of a music which does this in the way that Reich does
though there are things in classical Indian music which explore similar territory , i was thinking mainly (and my Indian music Knowledge is fairly rusty !) of Tehai's where a player will play a repeated phrase in a different beat cycle to that of the performance repeatedly until the first beat (sum) co-incides , usually accompanied by whoops from the audience. This is closer to the dropping / adding beat technique of Music for Pieces of Wood or Clapping Music than the phase shifting in Come Out etc

I'm not sure that McPhee's music uses this at all ? as it's not something he would have 'borrowed' from the Balinese tradition and much of his music (to my ears at least) is fairly close in a structural and rhythmic sense to Balinese Gamelan.

[Boilk]

Who, pray, before Reich, explored slowly changing phase relationships through a series of canonic steps until the phrase(s) being shifted against each other completed full cycles? Riley's In C has previously been cited, but there, any phase shifting is an accident on performance, not something derived from following the score as composed ... Do please offer a convincing example of what Reich refers to as his phase technique which pre-dates his use of it (in either tape or directly performed composition).

In the case of Hovhaness, there is not one rhythmic pattern phased against itself but multiple ones against each other, which is presumably why he called them orbits – rather like the solar system’s planets have their own periodicity and so phase in a more complex manner with each other.

I recall that in Hovaness's decidedly quirky 1950 St. Vartan Symphony (released on Unicorn Records circa 1975) there are numerous sections where instrumental parts (often percussion), do not share the same phrase, but repeat over and over their own melody or rhythmic ostinato. It’s literal repetition but with ever shifting relationships - I’d never heard this in any earlier Western music. Each part’s phrase length is different and usually prime-numbered in length (e.g. 11 crotchets, 19 quavers, 17 semi-quavers), thus maximising the length of a complete cycle before all parts come back in phase. This is a pertinent precedent for Reich's technique, even if it uses more than one phrase simultaneously. Interestingly, unlike Riech et al, this music is the BACKDROP to foreground melodic activity. I’ve heard the same technique in other works of his, but couldn’t cite them without a visit into the attic to unearth old LPs.

An earlier variant of this (used by him from the mid-40s) is where individual performers repeat a short phrase in their own time, non synchronous to what other players are doing. Bryn pointed out with regard to Riley’s In C, that there is intentional phase shifting as an ‘accident’ in performance, but with In C I understood there is a generic pulse and tempo to be observed, not so with Hovhaness. So Hovhaness foreshadowed, almost exactly, the 'pioneering' ad libitum found in Lutoslawski’s Jeux Venitiens almost two decades later.

[Dave2002]

Last month I heard the long Reich piece, Drumming, at the Queen Elizabeth Hall. It was ok but I couldn't really understand why it was 70 minutes rather than 10. If it was done in a dance hall, it's length might have had purpose but as concert music I missed the point. But it'll be interesting to hear the music's original spur and context.

I saw/heard Drumming at the Proms (2006?). I don't think it lasted 70 minutes, but it was more than 10. It was performed as much as a theatre piece as a musical one, with different groups moving around. It had visual as well as musical impact. I think these are the details - http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/proms2006/pip/m9v6p/

[hackneyvi]

I saw/heard Drumming at the Proms (2006?). I don't think it lasted 70 minutes, but it was more than 10. It was performed as much as a theatre piece as a musical one, with different groups moving around. It had visual as well as musical impact. I think these are the details - http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/proms2006/pip/m9v6p/

I've yet to compose a dignified reply (I'm not sure it's even possible) to SA's gracious elucidation in response to my flatulence above! But one of the things I meant was that it's duration might make sense if the audience were invited to dance to it. But for such a duration of energy to be played to a static crowd seemed a waste to me.

But looking at the wiki entry for the piece, recordings range from 55 to 84 minutes in length. I seem to have attended a medium duration performance but - in a nutshell - I found it theatrically and musically static. Though I see, understand, accept this is not the case with the piece. But to make a likeness, to me the movement is like the view from the passenger window of a bank-verged motorway; undeniably there's scenery and difference from moment to moment but the impressions aren't memorable except as a sort of compelling, restless monotony, inside me and out.

[MrGongGong]

I've yet to compose a dignified reply (I'm not sure it's even possible) to SA's gracious elucidation in response to my flatulence above! But one of the things I meant was that it's duration might make sense if the audience were invited to dance to it. But for such a duration of energy to be played to a static crowd seemed a waste to me.

But looking at the wiki entry for the piece, recordings range from 55 to 84 minutes in length. I seem to have attended a medium duration performance but - in a nutshell - I found it theatrically and musically static. Though I see, understand, accept this is not the case with the piece. But to make a likeness, to me the movement is like the view from the passenger window of a bank-verged motorway; undeniably there's scenery and difference from moment to moment but the impressions aren't memorable except as a sort of compelling, restless monotony, inside me and out.

One of the things (for me at least) that I love about pieces like Drumming (and the more "hard core" La Monte Young pieces) is that rather than being a music of narrative flow they are more like a "place to be". Last time I went to see La Monte Young the first note lasted 20 minutes, then when the second came in it was an extraordinary revelation, having been through the time of getting bored with one note we were able to hear as if for the first time. Not for everyone I know but tremendously rewarding if you are prepared to make the effort.

i'm also reminded of the Cage quote

"If something is boring after two minutes, try it for four. If still boring, then eight. Then sixteen. Then thirty-two. Eventually one discovers that it is not boring at all."

and from La Monte Young

"Contrast is for people who can't write music."

[hackneyvi]

One of the things (for me at least) that I love about pieces like Drumming (and the more "hard core" La Monte Young pieces) is that rather than being a music of narrative flow they are more like a "place to be". Last time I went to see La Monte Young the first note lasted 20 minutes, then when the second came in it was an extraordinary revelation, having been through the time of getting bored with one note we were able to hear as if for the first time. Not for everyone I know but tremendously rewarding if you are prepared to make the effort.

i'm also reminded of the Cage quote

"If something is boring after two minutes, try it for four. If still boring, then eight. Then sixteen. Then thirty-two. Eventually one discovers that it is not boring at all."

and from La Monte Young

"Contrast is for people who can't write music."

La Monte Young, of whom I confess I hadn't heard, had himself surely heard of Beethoven? It's a good quip but it's not true. The Cage quote though really does strike me as wisdom.

I take your point (and SA's) further back and I now understand that the intention of the music isn't what I'd thought. By coincidence, I've attended a couple of meditation classes in the last weeks and been intrigued by them and will take another opportunity to hear Reich bearing the Buddhist's ear rather than the 'commercial/consumptive's' in mind.

I'm grateful to you both for the points and information which may yet move the scales from my eyes.

I must take a look/listen at wiseman/wildman Cage.

[MrGongGong]

I think Youngs point is very true of his own music
he is concerned with the idea of tuning and temperament so that the idea that "tuning is a function of time" meaning that you have to listen to pitches for very long periods of time to perceive the intricacies of the relationship between notes. Contrast would render this impossible ! which is not to say that ALL music that has contrast is rubbish !

[Serial_Apologist]

[QUOTE=hackneyvi;59850]I've yet to compose a dignified reply (I'm not sure it's even possible) to SA's gracious elucidation in response to my flatulence above! But one of the things I meant was that it's duration might make sense if the audience were invited to dance to it. But for such a duration of energy to be played to a static crowd seemed a waste to me.[QUOTE]

Don't worry about me, hackneyvi - like me you're self- rather than academically taught in matters musical. You seem not to have attended many raves!

S-A

[french frank]

which is not to say that ALL music that has contrast is rubbish !

Nor, presumably, that all music that hasn't, isn't

Did anyone listen to the programme, btw?

[hackneyvi]

Don't worry about me, hackneyvi - like me you're self- rather than academically taught in matters musical. You seem not to have attended many raves!

S-A

The most I can say is 'self-exposed' to matters musical, rarely comprehending because rarely properly-attending but your admirably clear post about Reich does give me a chance to hear minimalist music 'fairly'. One of the key things that struck me recently thinking about my own abandonment of music in my 20s was that I'd come to expect fixed responses in myself from music and yet found the music wanting when I didn't respond in the requisite, fixed way.

You're quite right about attendance at raves (though with growing regularity I do perform raves on buses throughout East London now).

[Dave2002]

Nor, presumably, that all music that hasn't, isn't

Did anyone listen to the programme, btw?

Yes

[hackneyvi]

Did anyone listen to the programme, btw?

And I. Though I need to listen again because I missed the opening quarter. I can imagine it might have been unfulfilling for the already knowledgable but it seemed well-judged for the less-informed listener; people like me. I was interested by Nico Muhly's remarks that the music had advanced from Reich's and his violin piece was quite different to the other music I heard.

The feeling I have to lose, if I'm to feel purpose more in this music, is a sense of continuous sentimentality in some of its sounds; the Nyman Purcell (?) sounded like Purcell 'Pop-ed Up'.

The music also seemed, though the appearance is different, still to be intellectual music but of the kind that says 'all music is equally valuable' but, so far, this music is not valuable to me. It very much feels like what looks like a gift, and which gift turns out to be the repetitious print of the pretty pattern on the wrapping paper. It can be pretty and appealing but it's a prettification of a functional material.

And why does that read like an unapproving criticism because even if that's 'all' it is, there could be - is for others, with other ears - pleasure in such stuff.

[MrGongGong]

I thought it was inspired to start with the much neglected La Monte Young who is the godfather of so much Soundart and drone music

Glass also made the interesting (and sadly not really explored in great depth in this book http://www.amazon.co.uk/Fear-Music-P.../dp/1846941792) that the music that "corresponds" to the, now extremely popular, visual art of the time seems to have been overlooked.