An Approach to the Aural Analysis of Emergent Musical Forms

7/29/2019 An Approach to the Aural Analysis of Emergent Musical Forms

1/25

Lasse Thoresen

(with the assistance of Andreas Hedman and Olav Anton Thommessen)

FORM-BUILDING TRANSFORMATIONS

An Approach to the Aural Analysis of Emergent Musical Forms

3.1. On the Theoretical Background of Aural Sonology

The present approach to analysis, termed Aural Sonology, results from an attempt to

analyze music as represented on a phonogram, rather than on a score. This approach is

particularly useful for dealing with music for which no score is available (e.g.

electroacoustic music) or music in which there is no simple one-to-one correspondence

between score and the aural phenomenon (which is often the case with late romantic and

impressionist music as well as contemporary music), although music in which such a

correspondence is evident (e.g. classical Western music) is by no means excluded, as

long as the piece is represented on a phonogram. Aural Sonology shifts the focus of

musical analysis from applying analytical concepts to what the analyst sees in a score,towards what she hears. The musical object is not entirely an objective fact but is partly

constituted by the listeners intentions. Accordingly, in order to achieve a systematic

analytical approach with a degree of intersubjective consensus, the analysis must be

backed up by a theory of listening intentions, and these must not only be identified but

practiced by the analyst: she must learn to observe, discern and select a specific

listening intention of her own mind, as well as be able to set and maintain a consistent

focus on selected strands of the multidimensional reality of music as heard.[1]

The objective of this article is to present one particular method of analysis developed

within the framework. However, since Aural Sonology differs from most other

scholarly approaches to analysis, it will be useful for the reader to have a condensed

introduction to some of the theoretical and aesthetic assumptions on which it rests.

3.1.1. Background and Aesthetic Orientation

The Aural Sonology Project began in the 1970s. The two main influences were

Sonology as taught at the Institute of Sonology, Utrecht Netherlands (today moved to

the Royal Conservatory at the Hague), and the phenomenologically oriented,

spectromorphological point of view articulated by Pierre Schaeffers Trait des objets

musicaux, and further expanded at INA/GRM, Paris, France. The ideas gathered were

subsequently refined at the Norwegian Academy of Music in Oslo, through acollaboration between Professor Olav Anton Thommessen and the present author, both

of us professors of musical composition. The development of the methods of analysis

took place within the context of a circle comprising performers and composers, which

accounts for the general orientation towards an applied branch of music theory designed

to enhance artistic sensibilities and cognition. Aural Sonology has been regularly taught

at the Academy since the beginning of the 1980s, and has continued to evolve

interactively in the dialogue between students and teachers It has been the aim of the

project to develop a conceptual structure of analysis and theory that is not uniquely

reserved for a particular compositional style or expression, but addresses music

appreciation in Western art music on a general basis.


2/25

Aural Sonology has consistently been concerned with aural consciousness during a

period of music history in which creative musical thinking has largely been

concentrated on the development of novel compositional techniques and technology.

The serial composition technique depended on the written medium as its extratemporal

support; algorithmic approaches to music tended to substitute the sonic representation of

music with a model.[2] The motivation for launching the Aural Sonology Project was astrong impression that the aural aspect of contemporary music was being neglected by

contemporary composers to the detriment of its ability to communicate with a non-

specialized audience. The Aural Sonology Project therefore seeks to enhance the

listeners ability to encounter and evaluate the sonic results of any technical procedure,

by an explication and conceptualization of its perceived, auralsyntax. Moreover, Aural

Sonology intends to benefit from the study of the aural syntaxes and principles of form

in music that have already proven to make sense in a greater community of listeners.

This will be done through an effort to formulate observations in an abstract way such as

to facilitate its eventual transfer to new sonic materials. Therefore, Aural Sonology

seeks to conceptualize and represent graphically that which makes syntactical sense in

music as heard. That music even new music - ought to make sense to the averagelistener, not only to the composer or the intellectual elite, was a position occasionally

attacked by the most fervent adherents of the avant-garde, for whom alienation,

negation and fragmentation were the highest ideals for contemporary music.

The methodological approach chosen combines a phenomenological perspective with a

pragmatic use of selected structuralist techniques. Phenomenology provides the global

outlook, with its emphasis on the life world(hence music as heard), its explication of

intentionalities, and its emphasis on describing and reflecting on an experienced object,

rather than on its explanation.[3] Although a number of books and essays have been

written on the subject of musical phenomenology, as well as on music from a

phenomenological perspective, all seem to overlook the need to develop a terminology

suitable for describing the phenomenon of music in experiential terms, falling back

either on philosophical jargon, everyday language, or a terminology of traditional

musicological or acoustics, employing terms that are not coined within a consistent

phenomenological point of view. Aural Sonology has taken the step to construct a new

and consistent terminology based on aural experience and correlated through specified

structural relationships. While structuralist techniques provide helpful schemata for

organizing a conceptual world, structuralism as such lacks the concept of a conscious,

perceiving subject, and has a tendency to overlook the particular in favour of a

postulated universality. The phenomenological perspective counterbalances this

deficiency of structuralism. All the structural concepts developed are condensed into aset of graphic symbols, so that the concepts can be used in practical analysis.

3.1.2. Listening Intentions, Listening Behaviours

Music as heard is a phenomenon of enormous richness and ambiguity. People make

sense of music in a number of very different ways, which tends to make a meaningful

discussion about music problematic. Even when listening to the same piece of music,

interpreted by the same musicians, the listening experience itself, and its interpretation

in words, varies greatly. The musical experience consists of a synthesis of signs and

signals transmitted as sound, and of the listening subjects own perceptions and

conceptions of the music, i.e. his constitution of the musical object. Different listeningintentions constitute different musical objects.


3/25

Based on analysis of interviews with listeners, Francois Delalande, researcher at

INA/GRM, has come up with suggestions for a number oflistener behaviours, each of

which is representative of different musical listening intentions that constitute widely

different musical objects and interpretations. The present project can be seen as a

specialized development of one of these listener behaviours, that which has been termed

taxonomic listening. Francois Delalande (1998, pp. 26-27) defines this listeningbehaviour in the following way:

Taxonomic listening is manifest through the listeners tendency:

To distinguish sufficiently large morphological units such as sections or chains

and to make a mental list of them;

To qualify these, but just enough to distinguish them from each other,

To notice how these units are arranged in relation to one another,

To try and memorize all this data.

This is a listening behaviour that leads to the most neutral perceptual image possible in

the sense that the subjects who practice it aim: (1) to give a complete picture with little

detail, a map on a large enough scale without distorting the design; (2) to parenthesize

subjective characteristics which might affect the true image of the object For these

subjects it is a canvas on which one will subsequently be able to plot more personal

observations. It is conceived as a practical reference ... It is possible that these ideas of

pictures, maps and score graphic representations on paper correspond to what

happens in listening. Paper as a medium is associated with a double function: (1) a

memory aid; (2) an analytical tool for laying out the relative nature of units. (Delalande,

1998, pp. 26-27).

Expanding upon Francois Delalandes observation, it could be said that such a listening

attitude would favour the observation of forms, e.g. the study of how identifiable

smaller parts would integrate into greater wholes. In Aural Sonology we develop this

listening intention in a systematic fashion. The musical phenomenon, and the aural

investigation of it are generally divided into three levels:

Level 1:sound objects i.e. single sound objects, analyzed in spectromorphologic

terms.

Level 2: elementary gestalts i.e. combinations of sound objects into small

patterns.

Level 3:form gestalts i.e. patterns of elementary gestalts.

Traditionally, music theory and analysis has taken for granted the nature of the sound

objects being dealt with. However, it is clear that the pitched, stable sounds on which

traditional music theory are built is a special case in the larger world of sounds. The

main focus of traditional theory has been a discussion of how pitched sound objects can

be combined in scales, and chords and into larger compounds such as harmony

progressions, etc., all of which are clearly level 2 phenomena. Studies of contemporary

music are also largely concentrated on this level.


4/25

The focus of the Aural Sonology Project is on levels 1 and 3, with a clear emphasis on

level 3. Thus the analysis of musical forms as heard, level 3, is the focus of the present

article. This means that e.g. the harmonic structure of a piece will not be analyzed on its

own terms, and will only be significant to the extent its effect is deemed relevant for the

conception of an abstract formal model on level 3.

3.1.3. The Semiologic Tripartition

To analyze means to reflect, and to reflect is a complex process that both articulates the

perception of music into more details, and seeks to integrate the details into a

comprehension of the greater whole. Since the analytic process of reflection evolves

over time, it presumes that the object of reflection remains static. Thus the object must

be contained in an extra-temporal,stable, material medium permitting identical

repetition of the object researched. Moreover, the object under study should be

represented in such a way that it can be shared with others. For centuries, musical

notation has provided such a representation of the musical work in the Western context,

and has been a prerequisite for reflection and analysis. Therefore it has been accordedthe status of a kind of neutral, objective reality to which the community of researchers

could return in order to check one anothers conclusions.

The present approach to analysis consistently replaces the score with thephonogram as

the extra-temporal, material support of analytical reflection. The advent of recording

technology and loudspeakers has opened new horizons for analyzing music as heard.

The only reason why this approach does not seem to be much exploited in music theory,

analysis, and in musicology in general, seems to be a general scepticism towards the ear

as a sufficiently objective instrument of observation. Aural Sonology insists that

consensus with regard to listening intentions will solve this predicament and open a new

field of research, complementary to other, established disciplines. This is made possible

thanks to the heritage of Pierre Schaeffer, and his successors at GRM such as Guy

Reibel, Michel Chion, Francois Bayle, and Francois Delalande, who have carried out

pioneering efforts in sorting out the dimensions of the listening consciousness.

The semiologic tripartition may serve as an initial help in sorting out listening intentions

by correlating these to three aspects of the musical object.[4] The three domains are the

poetic domain (related to the process of creating a piece of music, thus dealing with the

composers techniques, strategies and expressive intentions, and also the performers

interpretative intentions), the esthesic domain (dealing with the listeners reception of

the music) and a neutraldomain (the uninterpreted, observable aspect of music).

Although initially useful, the semiologic tripartition, as proposed by Molino and

Nattiez, is problematic in a few respects. The third neutral domain appears by and large

to be a musicological construct since it is not clearly related to music as a system of

signs.[5] In a life worldperspective, it is above all music as heard (the esthesic domain)

that is associated with meaning formation. The creative aspect of music (the poetic

domain) is also relevant to meaning formation, first of all the intentions of composers

and performers and their personal and cultural context, and the processes and techniques

of composing and performing. It is therefore reasonable to propose a reorganization of

the semiotic tripartition, in which the neutral domain is seen as the observable aspects

of the esthesic and the poetic domains, respectively, and its status as an independentdomain of research is reduced considerably.


5/25

The restructuring of the semiologic tripartition proposed above, suggests there is a

manifest and a hidden side to the esthesic and the poetic domains, respectively.

The manifest side comprises the material traces of the work, while the hidden comprises

the expressive aspect, that which is concerned with meaning or musical sense. The

manifest side always has a potential for being neutral, in the sense that it is

observable, and since it is observable it can be shared with others and form the basis for

shared understanding. Admittedly, isolating the neutral sphere of music is somehow

artificial, since many listeners behaviours do not favour giving focused attention to the

material aspect of the sound experience, such as the sound itself. When diverting from

the listener behaviour that is the preferred when listening to a particular kind of music,

one risks missing features that are pertinent to the formations of musical meaning

understood as feelings, general ideas, world views etc. This can only be compensated

for by the analysts consciousness of the artificiality of isolating one aspect of music as

heard, and by his mastery of other, complementary listeners intentions. In other words:

the ability to shift between different listener attitudes becomes a prerequisite for relatingto music in a way that avoids the disadvantages of reductionism.

The analytical focus of Aural Sonology, then, is the neutral side of the esthesic domain,

i.e. the material, observable aspects of the aural experience. The neutral side of the

esthesic domain must be constitutedby an act of the listener through his choosing the

requisite listening intention. The two listener intentions preferred for our analytical

purposes are the reductive listeningintention (for level 1 this is, briefly, the intention to

hear sound as sound, and will not be further dealt with in this article) and the taxonomic

listening(levels 1 and 2).[6]

A study of the neutral domain (as defined above) will in fact be a study of the signifiantof the musical sign. In a semiotic perspective, such a study may only be relevant for

approaching itssignifi (interpreting its meaning) to the extent that the musical signs

used are motivated signs (dealing with iconic or indexical links between expression and

content) rather than arbitrary ones (defined purely by convention). The relative lack of

musical vocabularies suggests that music is mostly a system of motivated signs.[7] Thus

studies of the neutral aspects of music are potentially relevant also for approaching

musical meaning thesignifi.

The analyses produced by the methods introduced by Aural Sonology are definitely not

compositional techniques. Nevertheless they may be of great value to composers and

performers, since listening and reflecting on the aural reality of music in most casescontributes positively to the quality of music making and performing. Thus while Aural


6/25

Sonology analyses are focused on the neutral side of the esthesic domain, the exercise

of conducting such analyses is a useful one for giving the composer a number of more

specific ideas about the shaping of his compositions, as it develops his ability to

conceive of what he eventually would like to hear when the piece is being performed;

such an exercise also encourages performers to shape their interpretations guided by a

greater awareness of how musical gestalts evolve in time and affect the listener.

3.1.4. Gestalts and Structures

Music exists in our life world long before we learn to discuss language and grammars

conceptually. We are able sing a melody long before we can define what pitch is

verbally; music makes sense to us as listeners and performers long before we can

describe musical form. Music is mostly learnt like a mother tongue; we learn to speak it

before we learn its grammar. A native speaker relies on his ear to determine whether a

certain combination of words is acceptable and correct. Similarly, musical thought

understands in terms ofaural gestalts, whose wellformedness is judged in an analogous

fashion, relying on the ear. Music theory and analytical methods generally try tocomprehendmusic in a conceptual way, describing the intrinsic coherence of the

gestalts throughstructural terms, which is basically what grammars do in relation to

spoken language. Grammars do not define a language; they describe a language that is

already given in the life world. Similarly, the comprehension of musical structure,

which is a central concern to the Aural Sonology Project, will always be a subset of

what can be understoodby a listener subjected to the temporal flow of musical gestalts.

Aural Sonology takes as its starting point the experience of ordered, sonorous gestalts

in music as heard. The point of departure of the analyst is, accordingly, an emergent

phenomenon; from here, she proceeds in the direction of defining her experience by

assigning to her experience a description in terms of structure. The initial perspective is

holistic: the analyst starts with a concrete phenomenon as a given whole, meeting it with

an attentive and receptive consciousness. The holistic orientation in combination with

elements of applied phenomenology and structuralism, make the present project

different from a number of more traditional approaches to analysis; e.g. it differs from

the methodological position ofoperational structuralism that tries to explain

phenomena through the disclosure of generative relationships within the object

researched.[8]

Aural Sonology is characterized by an effort to develop means for the description of the

perceived musical order, and, to the extent possible, correlate the order or gestaltheard with a theoretical structure (which is an ideal object in phenomenological terms).

It must be underlined again that the kind of structure found by our methods of analysis

is notone that is intrinsic to the construction of the object studied, as it does not

necessarily explain itsgenesis. Rather, it is a concrete instance of experienced order of

an object; and this experience is founded both in objective musical reality andat the

same time in certain constitutive intentions on the part of the listener. The equivalent of

musical structure in the esthesic domain is actually the experience of order, pattern and

regularity. Thus the object analyzed presupposes an active constitution on the part of

the listener. Combining this with the vehicle of a defined method of analysis, it may be

possible to make pertinent statements about the experience of music that can be

communicated to others who share the same conceptual orientation and master therequisite listening intention. Of course, what the analyst finds in this way is not


7/25

necessarily an intrinsic or essential part of the musics purported meaning, which, in its

original traditional context, might presuppose another constitutive intention.

Accordingly, using the methods of Aural Sonology, one cannot without further

qualifications make definite judgments about the total aspect of meaning and

signification of the work analyzed. This will have to be dealt with by methods

complementary to ours, i.e. the hermeneutical methods often used by traditionalmusicology and semiology. However, every scientific methodology constitutes its own

object of research, and in the final analysis, there is no definite and conclusive truth that

can be stated about a work of art. Only by approaching music from many sides, i.e.

through the use of complementary methods, can one see to achieve a more complete

understanding.[9]

Aural Sonology as a method can thus be seen as an effort to correlate the experience of

musical gestalts with a set of structured concepts. The nature and number of these

concepts are largely inconstant, and what we can propose probably only represents a

beginning that serves to lay down certain basic features of musical perception and

cognition as related to form.

3.1.5. Isotopy and Selective Listening

The structural models devised in Aural Sonology will all have to be related to a

consistent selection of features in the perceived music. Music as heard is a concretum,

and is therefore a composite of several attributes, containing an almost infinite amount

of information, given the number of listener intentions by which it can be heard. In our

analytical context, the analyst will have to select and focus consistently on one strand of

aural order; one that seems to be of importance to the organization of the music as a

whole. Such a consistent focus on organizing features within the musical context could

be termed an isotopy with a term adopted from structural semantics.[10]

An isotopy in our context is a consistent strand of aural gestalts perceived to contain

features essential for the organization of long stretches of the musical discourse. An

isotopy may be said to be the underlying problem space of a piece of music, thus the

overarching aspect of complementary opposites. Organization is not here seen as being

primarily a compositional strategy (which is a fact belonging to the poetic domain); it

is what the listener perceives as coordinating or creating coherence in the musical

discourse, by means of recurrent patterns and related contrasts.For each particular

musicalisotopy there is a corresponding particular selective listening intention.

The Aural Sonology Project has thus far focused mainly on level 3 in creating

methodical approaches to isotopic structures. Thegeneralisotopies relevant to form

building that we at present have managed to develop are:[11]

Time-fields (the temporal segmentation of the musical discourse)

Layers (the synchronous segmentation of the musical discourse)

Dynamic form (time directions and energetic shape)

Thematic form (recurrence, variation, and contrast)

Formal transformations (looser and firmer gestalts, transformations betweenthem).


8/25

The present article will concentrate on Formal transformations, while touching on

thematic form (form-building processes) as well. In addition to such general formal

isotopies, there are other types as well:

Actual, thematized isotopies: Each piece may have its individual musical

isotopy, i.e. recurrent patterns and related opposites that take place within thesame isotopy, and/or interrelated passages between different isotopies.

Condensed, essential isotopies: Recurrent features may be given a condensed

representation in which the isotopic fields are reduced to essential formulae.

Such an essential isotopy can combine several strands of isotopical description,

and define a musical deep structure.

Condensed isotopies can be seen as contextual meanings, i.e. as the observable

side of an iconic sign with asignifi in the extra-musical domain.

3.2. Musical Form

In his concise book on traditional forms in Western art music, Arnold Schoenberg

(1977, p. 20) makes a number of interesting observations concerning the nature of

musical forms in general, and their importance for the reception of the music: Form

means that the piece is organized, and organization means that the music consists of

elements functioning like those of a living organism. Like the elements of an organism,

the constituent parts of music must be differentiated according to their importance and

function, but the differentiation must never endanger the underlying unity of the

composition. Form in this sense ensures intelligibility, logic and coherence; it is what

makes the music comprehensible. Concern about form is a means of surmounting

limited powers of human understanding; as a person is unable to keep in mind very long

time stretches, the musical discourse must be subdivided into manageable segments.However, these shorter segments must again be joined by relation to the others in such a

way that one segment presupposes the other and vice versa. This is what one could call

formal functions, in a sense similar to that we have with harmonic functions. Variety

can endanger comprehensibility and logic, and this can be avoided by subjecting the

musical elements to appropriate constraints. Delimitation, subdivision and simple

repetition are useful in counteracting the tendency toward disproportionate variety. In

fact, Schoenberg states that musical comprehension is impossible without repetition.

But repetition can easily cause monotony and boredom on the part of the listener. This

must be counteracted by variation of the repeated elements. In a true work of music that

obeys the classical laws of internal unity, even musical contrasts should be related.

The ideal oforganic form as discussed by Schoenberg is also essential to our approach.

When it comes to form, we are concerned with subdivisions in the sense of how the

musical object can be articulated through phrases and sections, as well as through

simultaneous layers. Proceeding from here, we are also concerned with the functions

these subdivisions have in relation to one another. Aural Sonology discusses form as an

emergentphenomenon, i.e. it takes account of the phenomenon as such, without giving

an account of why or how the form shows up the way it does. This means that whether

the form is based on harmonic fields, thematic recurrence, tensions and relaxations, or

contrasting textures, the form is accounted for in an abstract sense. Our study of form is

confined to level 3, and does not offer insight into what happens on level 1 or level 2(referring to the levels we defined in chapter 1.2). This level of abstractness will


9/25

enhance the potential of our method to cross over stylistic borders, while it renounces

the precision and specificity of an analysis that shows how the forms are founded in

concrete musical realities.

Approaching musical forms as emergent forms is fundamentally different from

approaching musical forms as normative conventions. The difference lies more in theattitude than the facts; when looking for emergent forms the music itself has to be

allowed to present its own form, its own rationality to the listeners ear, and this

presupposes a listener who ideally should be willing to bracket her preconceptions of

form during the first hearings of a piece of music, and only afterwards apply his already

acquired assumptions of form with sensitivity and honesty in order to avoid forcing the

music into a wrong or inadequate mould. The aesthetic implication of this is a

conception of musical form that would regard good form more in terms of its emergent

wholeness and rationality, rather than as compliance to formal conventions and codes.

The concept of emergent forms is closely linked to the idea that musical comprehension

can never entirely match musical understanding, which means paraphrasing Pascal -

that the ear can have reasons that the reasoning mind has not yet grasped.

Aural Sonology has developed consistent approaches to three aspects of musical form:

form-buildingfunctions (dynamic forms),[12] form-buildingprocesses (forms based on

recurrence and contrast), and form-building transformations (forms contrasting loose

and firm gestalts).[13] The remainder of our presentation will focus on the latter, the

form-building transformations, and in no way aspires to deal exhaustively with musical

form in general.

3.2.1. Typology of Form-Building Elements

The perception of musical form arises from the perceived interrelationships between

certain constituent elements. The elements constitutive of form will be calledform-

building elements (or simple form elements). These are often found in the

melodic/rhythmic lines in the foreground layer(s).[14] Most of the time background

elements can be left out. There are, however, cases in which musical textures as such

obtain form-building significance. Thus the discussion of the complexity of form-

elements will have to apply both to lines (i.e. melodic/rhythmic elements) and to

textures.[15]

The typology of form-building elements is based on their complexity (see Figure 1):


10/25

Figure 1

o Very simple elements. Examples: repetitive figures with a couple of pitches and

even rhythmical values such as very simple accompaniment figures (lines);

monophony or basic homophony (texture).

o Relatively simple elements. Examples: articulated yet simple figures such as

scales/passages or refined accompaniment figures (lines); heterophony, orhomophony with slight polyphonic elements (texture).

o Medium complex elements. Examples: a classical, simple theme (lines); a two-

or three-part simple polyphony (texture).

o Relatively complex elements. Examples: complex themes with great diversity of

pitch and rhythm (lines); complex polyphony (texture).

o Very complex elements. Examples: extremely asymmetric lines using a large

number of values in an unpredictable manner (lines); accumulations in

electroacoustic and avant-garde music (texture).

The scale of complexity may to some extent be considered relative to the composition

or to the style of the composition that is being analyzed.

A form-element, e.g. a theme, will often be presented in its integral form, then broken

down by being partitioned into smaller units. The symmetrically opposite shapes of the

sign for partitioned elements may be used to suggest the opening or closing features of

the context or of the (often preceding) integral element from which they have been

partitioned.

The simple arrangement of degrees from simple to complex is, however, not sufficient

to describe a range of phenomena that is perceived as pertinent for the aural experience

of musical form. One such phenomenon is that of articulation, another that of distinction


11/25

(i.e. of being characteristic). When a form-element is well articulated, it is in possession

of a reasonable number of details that are distinctly perceivable as such. A high

articulation will be an additional feature of the middle range complexities. Most

classical themes are well articulated. However, passagework, soloist figurations etc.

may have medium complexity without being highly articulated; theme-like passages

have structural complexity, passagework ornamental complexity. Structuralcomplexity is by definition highly articulated, while ornamental complexity is not.

When a form-segment is distinctive, it has a character that tends to set it apart in the

particular piece in which it occurs to such a degree that, in hindsight, it could be

considered typical or representative for the piece as a whole. Distinction also means that

certain form-elements are unique to the particular piece in question, setting it apart from

other pieces within the same style. As an example, one may think of a piece of bebop

jazz that presents the theme to begin with; this will be a distinctive element. The

improvisations that follow will be characterized by passages and figurations, often

rather complex, but they will mostly be more typical of the genre of bebop jazz, or of

the player, than of the piece as such. These form-elements will not be marked out asdistinctive in our analysis. In order not to unduly complicate the method of analysis, we

have opted not to develop separate analytical tools for articulation and distinction, since

they often seem to be connected. If the need to draw a distinction were to arise, it would

be better to do so in a verbal commentary to the analysis.

The linear arrangement of elements from simple to complex will have to be reorganized

since that which was formerly a middle value, i.e. the medium complex form-element,

has now been taken to represent a maximum of distinction or articulation. At the

opposite extreme of high articulation and distinction we thus find the very simple and

the very complex grouped together as equivalent in being unarticulated and anonymous.

[16]

A form-building element that possesses high articulation or distinction will have a

horizontal line drawn through its sign. The signs for articulation and distinction can also

be used to qualify textures when these are sufficiently unique and characteristic. A

conceptual space that has been reorganized according to criteria of articulation and

distinction will look more like a circle than a line. To close the circle a new sign has

been added, one designed to show the combination of an internally complex, yet

globally simple form-building segment (see Figure 2).


12/25

Figure 2

3.2.2. Context Organization of Form-Elements

Form-buildingsegments will be defined through the combination of form-elements (as

presented in the typology above) into an organized context. A form-segment is a

coherent succession of form-elements, where the evaluation of similarity and contrast

between adjoining elements will serve as the main criterion for determining what

belongs to the form-segment and what does not. Thus, when there is similarity between

juxtaposed form-elements, a coherent form-segment is easily created. Contrasts tend to

fragment coherent segments or set them off from each other; however, fragmented form

elements, too, can be held together in unifying gestalt (a phrase) due to other musical

dimensions, such as harmony, or constant background layers. Although the form-

segments generally tend to be a succession, there are also situations in which elements

are superposed in simultaneity.

In order to demarcate a form-segment in notation, a number of constituent form-

elements will be joined together by lines indicating identity or similarity (see Figure 3).

Figure 3 L. v. BeethovensPiano Sonata op. 2:1, movement I, first phrase [recording]

Breaking the line joining similar form-building segments indicates a greater degree of

contrast (see Figure 4).


13/25

Figure 4 L. v. BeethovensPiano Sonata op. 2:1, movement I, beginning of

development [recording]

In the above example, further precision is added through a sign specifying the degree of

similarity. This is one of a scale of 6 signs suggesting degrees of similarity (see Figure

5).[17]

Figure 5

A partitioning of an integral element will become a fragment if it is further abbreviated

or set off by pauses. A dot over the partitioned element or one breaking the line that

connects the form-elements of greater similarity will be used (see Figure 6).

Figure 6 L. Janacek, String Quartet,Kreutzer Sonata, movement 3 [recording]

The context organization will often reveal hierarchical structures in which shorter form-

segments combine to form larger segments (see Figure 7).

Figure 7 L. v. Beethoven op. 2:1 beginning movement I [recording]

When form-elements are superposed simultaneously in different layers, they may be

drawn on the vertical line. The preferred upper limit for displaying form-elements in

synchronicity would be no more than four elements on one line. As mentioned,

background elements may generally be left out (see Figure 8).


14/25

Figure 8 J. S. Bach,Ihr aber seid nicht fleischlich [recording]

If a more detailed analysis of simultaneous form-elements is desirable, the specific

indications of complexities can be integrated into a supplementary layer analysis.

When the superposition of form-elements reaches a certain complexity or merge

perceptually, they should be denoted as a texture, rather than single elements. Slurs

mark the transition from single elements to texture (see Figure 9).

Figure 9

3.2.3. Form-Building Transformations

The termform-building transformations describes a set of patterns that result from

characteristic combinations of types of form-elements. While the form-building

processes are concerned with patterns of recurrence, variation, and contrast, form-

building transformations are concerned with the logic of the organization of complexity

vs. simplicity, wholeness vs. division, lines vs. textures, distinctive vs. anonymous

passages.

Form-transformations can be eitherdiscontinuous orcontinuous. In a continuous

transformation the passage from one state to the opposite takes place in a linear fashion;

in the case of a discontinuous transformation (the normal case in classical music) the

passage may be step-wise, or may simply contrast the initial state of the transformationwith its end or its inverse. The transformation is also discontinuous when a linear

transformation is interrupted by sections of another character (see Figure 10).

Figure 10


15/25

Form-building transformations can take the form ofalternation: the musical discourse

moves to and fro between two different states of a transformation.

Different types of form transformations are listed below. The transformations are non-

exclusive; i.e. they may be combined. For the sake of conceptual simplicity, they are

divided into four types:Simple vs. complex, part vs. whole; few vs. many; distinctive vs. anonymous . Each

category is exemplified with two examples, one in a classical or romantic repertoire,

one from the modern repertoire (see Figure 11).


16/25

Figure 11

The transformation from complex to simple is termed simplification. The inverse

transformation is termed complication.


17/25

Figure 12Simplification: F. Mendelssohn Bartholdy, String quartet op.44:1 [recording]

Comments to the analysis: Thissimplification comes after a process of partitioning the

main theme, and recombining the parts into a polyphonic play. (The transformations

liquidation and crystallization will be discussed in detail in the next chapter). The

relative contrast between the two simple bars at the end, and the relative complex

texture of the preceding fugato, may qualify it as a discontinuous transformation,

although the collection of the preceding polyphony into a synchronized chordal descent

serves to round it off, and prepare the introduction of the simple final section.

Figure 13Simplification: G. Grisey,Modulations [recording]

Comments to the analysis: This example shows a continuous transformation of textures

that become simpler and simpler. The example has been considerably abbreviated.

Figure 14 Complication: L. v. Beethoven,Diabelli Variations, op 120 [recording]

Comments to the analysis: The example presents the beginning of three consecutive

variations (nos. 15, 16, 17) each of them with the same, underlying chordal progression.

The motivic elements remain relatively simple; however the textural element seems to

dominate over the melodic, and accordingly the analysis shows the development of

textural complexity. The transformation is discontinuous. The build-up in complexity is

supported by a step-wise increase in energy (dynamics, tempo, register); this, however,

is part of the dynamic form, thus belonging to another formal isotopy. Nonetheless, the

synergy between the two isotopies is evident.

Figure 15 Complication: I. Xenakis,Persephassa [recording]

Comments to the analysis: A continuous transformation (complication) passes from

regular pulses with some irregular elements, to a texture of irregular pulses, thus from

relativelysimple to very complex texture.


18/25

The transformation from integral (undivided) to partitioned (divided) is called

partitioning. The inverse transformation is called integration. This transformation is

also applicable to both lines and textures.

Figure 16Partitioning: L. v. Beethoven,Piano Sonata op. 2:2 [ open in separate

window ]

Figure 17Partitioning: W. Walton, Symphony no 2 [ open in separate window ]

Figure 18Integration: F. Liszt:Eine Faust Symphonie, first movement [recording]

Comments to the analysis: The motive of (one of) the contrast theme(s) is prepared by a

few notes set apart by inserted brass fragments. The initial motive, despite taking part in

an integration transformation, is itself firstpartitioned, while the dynamic form leads

the process on to the forte presentation of the integratedtheme.

Figure 19Integration: A. V. Mosolov, Savod[ open in separate window ]

The exacerbation of the latter transformations is termed fragmentation andsynthesis,

respectively. This transformation can also take place both with lines and textures.

Figure 20 Fragmentation: C. P. E. Bach,Keyboard Sonata in F sharp minor, Wq 52/4,

H37: No. 1 [recording]

Comments to the analysis: The music alternates between two highly divergent

characters, and there is no attempt to pave the way for the new by a rounded or finished

ending of the respective segments. The context, therefore, isfragmented.

Figure 21 Fragmentation: G. Ligeti,Etude 3 (Book 1) Touches bloques [recording]

Comments to the analysis: The end of this etude is a gradual transformation, brought

about by an increasing number of muted keys between the sounding ones. In the

preceding form segment (not presented here) there is another, more dramatic

presentation of afragmentedtexture. It would be reasonable to state thatsynthesis

(opening of the piece) vs.fragmentation is an actualorthematizedisotopy underlying

this piece, the indexical logic of which is derived from the play on muted vs. sounding

keys.


19/25

Figure 22Synthesis: F. Liszt,Piano Sonata in b-minor[ open in separate window ]

Figure 23Synthesis: L. Thoresen, Tradlarudl [ open in separate window ]

The transformation fromsingle lines to severalsuperposed lines (that still are

perceptible as lines) is termedproliferation, typical for starting with a few simpleelements, to which more are added. The inverse transformation is called collection: It

starts with a number of superposed elements, and ends with a simple one, or a simple

collection of the elements.

Figure 24Proliferation and Collection: J. C. Bach, Sinfonia op. 18, no 1 [ open in

separate window ]

Figure 25Proliferation: K. Stockhausen, Gruppen (1) [ open in separate window ]

Figure 26 Collection: W. Lutoslawski,Paroles Tisss [recording]

Comments to the analysis: The selected example begins with a proliferation of small

cells; eventually they fuse into a texture, while a new linear element is added on top,

continuing theproliferation. The sudden introduction of the solo line represents a

discontinuous collection of the previousproliferation.

A further development of the previous transformation happens when manysuperposed lines become a texture (everything from a chord to a more intricate pattern);

this transformation is calledfusion. The inverse transformation is calledfission

(beginning with a texture which is dissolved into the perception of individual elements).

A common example in classical and baroque music would be the contrasting of

polyphony and homophony. A proliferation transformation a multiplication of

elements - can halt before the lines start integration into a texture; however if it does,

the proliferation may be seamlessly followed by a fusion. The Example from K.

Stockhausens Gruppen is a demonstration of this; it moves from proliferation to fusion.

Figure 27 Fusion: J. S. Bach, Omnes Generationes fromMagnificatin D major

[ open in separate window ]

Figure 28 Fusion: K. Stockhausen, Gruppen (2 & 3) [recording]

Comments to the analysis: The sound example begins more or less where the previous

recording ofGruppen stopped, i.e. at a stage in which the linear element identification

of individual lines and instrument sounds tends to become difficult and the listening

mind changes its intentions from trying to perceive individual parts to grasping a global

object. At this point, thefusion takes place. This spot is not in any way marked by the


20/25

music; it takes place solely in the listeners mind, and the exact spot where it occurs,

cannot be objectively determined. At a certain point the complex texture

(accumulation it could be called, using a term from Schaeffers spectromorphology)

turns into a simpler texture of huge chords. This can be seen as anotherfusion; or it

could be conceived as an anamorphosis (discussed later). Long, linear evolutions, like

the one shown through the two examples from Gruppen, can sometimes be toopredictable to keep the listeners attention; but not so in this case. The composer has

ingeniously interspersed the evolution with surprises: sudden, interpolated single notes.

Thus a secondary element ofcollection runs counter to the general evolution

(proliferation). This aspect is not represented in the analysis shown.

Figure 29 Fission: G. F. Hndel, All We Like Sheep from The Messiah [ open in

separate window ]

Figure 30 Fission: W. Lutoslawski,Jeux Vnitiens [ open in separate window ]

A further development of the two previous cases occurs when a form segmentbecomes extremely complex, loses inner articulation and is ultimately turned into a

simple, unarticulated segment. The transformation from extremely complex directly to

simple form segments is called anamorphosis; the inverse transformation

catamorphosis. Examples of this pair of transformations are rarely, if at all, found in

classical music, although they do occur occasionally in the avant-garde music of the

20th century. These transformations pass out from the ordinary context of polyphony

vs. homophony (fission vs. fusion), in that they carry the transformation to a complete

extreme by transforming texture into a simple sound object.

Figure 31Anamorphosis: L. Thoresen, Ovringar, ending

Comments to the analysis: The example shows the end ofOvringar. It begins in the

middle of a very complex texture, which still can be heard as separate parts. From here a

fusion begins, which eventually (after the cut in the examples) continues as an

anamorphosis: the transformation of texture into sound, in this case noise (examples of

similar transformations are found e.g. in the music of T. Murail (Memoires, Erosions),

G. Grisey, and K. Saariaho).

Figure 32 Catamorphosis: L. Thoresen, Ovringar, opening

Comments to the analysis: This example shows the opening ofOvringar, analyzed as a

catamorphosis, the symmetric opposite ofanamorphosis, which is the transformation

ending the piece. It shows the gradual passage from a relatively simple noise sound into

textures of increasing inner activity and articulation. Eventually a fission takes place anda melodic element emerges.


21/25

The final pair of transformations listed, liquidation and crystallization, require a

definition ofPrgnanzto be understood, and examples will be given at the end of the

next chapter.

3.2.4. Prgnanz

In the last pair of form-transformations discussed above, that of

liquidation/crystallization, one other characteristic of musical form is involved, namely

that ofPrgnanz. This is an emergent quality considered essential for the presentation

of the classical theme, which thus deserves a more detailed discussion. The word

Prgnanzused in a musical context could be said to have two meanings: One would

suggest that we have an idea that gives birth to materials and ideas that are essential to

the further development of the composition. A theme in a sonata, as opposed to a

melody in a song, would have this quality.[18] The word can also refer to the gestalt

quality of the statement itself, and it is on this aspect of the concept we shall concentrate

in this context. In the latter sense, apregnantform-segment is characterized by an

optimal combination of articulated, distinctive form-elements, contextual self-affirmation and well-defined boundaries, and good continuation. Moreover, the form-

elements have to be sufficiently complex and articulated, and they can never belong to

the lowest category of differentiation (simple form-elements) or to that of extreme

complexity. The tendency towards articulation and complexity must, however, be

counterbalanced by a self-affirming or redundant context, which means that the form-

elements or segments must be repeated (exactly or varied) in the immediate context.

It would be reasonable to assume that the more complex the form-elements are, the

more repetitions could be allowed without losingPrgnanz(this still remains to be

demonstrated). Too much repetition, however, will lessen thePrgnanzof the form-

segment, just as, symmetrically, too much information will threaten its unity and

comprehensibility. To have well-defined boundaries, the pregnant gestalt needs to occur

in a phrase whose ending is clearly marked out in the context.

The criterion of a good continuation applies to the immediate surroundings of the

distinctive core statement of a pregnant gestalt. The beginning of the score statement

should preferably be well prepared by the previous score statement so the listener is

alerted to the coming of something important. After the important information there

should be a phase that allows for absorption of the information without introducing

anything significant and new, and the listener should moreover be alerted to the

imminent ending of the pregnant statement. In this way the listener will be able todetach the information from the context, remember it outside the general flow of

temporal retentions and protensions, and transfer it to his/her long-term memory. The

musical information may now be consciously recalled and its return expected. The

articulated part of a pregnant statement should be surrounded by less important

surroundings (thus materials with more anonymity).

In a larger musical context, a pregnant theme presentation mostly serves to present

musical information in a fashion that is both comprehensible and memorable. Therefore,

a pregnant organization of the constituent motives of a particular piece into a distinct

theme will enhance the ability of the listener to comprehend the piece as a whole,

provided the remaining piece avails itself of the musical elements presented in the initialgestalt. This latter condition is, in fact, one attribute of the phenomenon ofPrgnanz


22/25

itself, namely the law of good continuation, and is moreover intrinsic to the

understanding of a theme as opposed to a melody.

One instance of the presentation of a distinctive thematic motive could look like this

(see Figure 12):

Figure 33

Here, two well articulated/distinctive form-elements are repeated in a clearlydemarcated phrase. What is not shown in this example is whether the criterion of good

continuation is fulfilled. The form-building transformation ofliquidation creates a

context for the distinctive form elements that allows them both to stand out, and to be

absorbed by the listener. The liquidation process thwarts the balance between

information and redundancy in favour either of differentiation, or of redundancy, so that

distinctive materials can stand out in relation to less distinctive materials. If the less

distinctive materials are related to the distinctive ones, the effect of the liquidation is

also to allow the information to sink in and to be absorbed by the listener. The inverse

transformation we have termed crystallization suggesting the movement from looser to

firmer gestalts.[19]

The classical theme is the ultimate example ofPrgnanz, combining firm gestalts with

the loosely organized form-segments, such as the ones used in passagework, transitional

passages etc., in the same way that a foreground presupposes a background. The

combination of repeated, self-affirming, characteristic motives in a context with looser

forms gives us the prototypical shapes of the ways in which a theme is presented in a

classical work: ThePeriod(consisting of two major time segments, i.e. an antecedent

and a consequent, each of which begins with a distinctive motive followed by less

distinctive materials), and the Sentence (an initial repetition of the distinctive motive,

followed by transformations of the same motive, breaking it down to less characteristic

configurations) (see Figure 13).

Figure 34aPeriod: Mozart,Piano Sonata in A minorKV 310, 2nd movement

[recording]


23/25

Figure 34bSentence: Beethoven,Piano Sonata in C majorop. 2:2 [recording]

Crystallization is a less studied phenomenon; as a musical form it is probably the

creation of late classicism or early romanticism. It inverts the position of firm and loose

gestalts that we find in the classicalsentence, by placing the loose material in front of

the core motive. One is given the impression of witnessing the genesis of a theme,

rather than being faced with a finished statement that has to be absorbed. The definitive

example of this type of transformation is the opening of Beethovens ninth symphony.

Figure 35 Crystallization: L. v. Beethoven, Symphony no. 9, mov. I [ open in separate

window ]

While liquidation and crystallization are linked to distinctiveness, they can be supported

by most of the aforementioned transformations. Examples have already been shown:

o Figure 12 (Mendelssohn's Quartet in D major) demonstrates a liquidation by

partitioningand followed byproliferation, terminating bysimplification.

o Figure 18 (contrast theme in LisztsEine Faust Symphonie) and 22: (The b-

minor sonata by F. Liszt) show a similar formal construction: Thesynthesis

transformation supports the crystallization transformation. After the theme is

presented in a firm gestalt, a liquidation throughpartitioningfollows. The

formal pattern suggested is therefore symmetric: crystallization, repeatedpresentation of distinctive materials, liquidation.

o Figure 24 (Sinfonia op. 18, no 1 by J. C. Bach) the transformations ofcollection

andproliferation are organized as a period: The antecedent consists of a focused

main motive (collection) followed by aproliferatingsegment; then a consequent

is constructed in the same way. The focus on collection andproliferation is

maintained in the transitional passage that follows, although the motives used

may only be distantly related to that of the characteristic motive.

o Figure 32 (Thoresen, beginning ofOvringar) shows a catamorphosis that is

being followed by afission, as the result of which a melodic shape emerges (a

motive from a piece of archaic fiddle music. The catamorphosis andfission

realize a long-range crystallization transformation, reinforced by the forward-

oriented dynamic function, thus preparing the arrival of the folk tune in a

pregnant context(not included in the sound example).

The pregnant formulation of a musical statement is very much linked to the classical

conception of a characteristic and memorable theme the theme as the theorem. This

particular musical feature is seldom found in the contemporary music created during the

last 60 years; many composers whether of the serialist, spectralist, electroacoustic, or

minimalist schools, insisted on the importance of avoiding pregnant statements. An

example of a contemporary use of materials for this purpose is demonstrated in Figure36.


24/25

Figure 36Liquidation: L.ThoresenIlluminations [recording]

Comments to the analysis: At the very opening of this double concerto for two

violoncelli and orchestra a static sound prepares the listener to prepare for the erupting

fortissimo texture. This texture has a medium complexity, and is one of the most

characteristic textures of the piece. The next texture suggests afission, presenting

melodic elements deduced from the motives used by the two solo cellos (not included in

the sound example); however the next textures are less articulatedand of a simpler

kind. A backward leaning or reclining dynamic function supports the transformation

from complex to simple texture. Thus a virtual liquidation transformation is made

without linear elements.

In classical music, the normal way to carry out liquidation is through partitioning and

fragmentation. However, simplification, proliferation, fusion and anamorphosis are also

potential vehicles of liquidation. Similarly, the vehicle of crystallization is normally

integration, but can also be synthetization, complication, collection, fission and

catamorphosis.

However, the context organization of the form segments can also exert an influence on

the perception ofPrgnanz. E.g. if the same distinctive element is repeated excessively,

it will become redundant and devoid of interest, thus in effect resembling a

simplification transformation that affects the very substance of the musical material.

3.2.5. Closing Comments

The preceding presentation of form-building transformations is not entirely complete,

since a study of listener modalities in relation to form-building transformations has been

left out in order to keep the length of this paper within reasonable limits. However, even

if that study had been included, the discussion of musical form would by no means be

comprehensive. At least two other form-building isotopies, namely form-building

functions, and form-building processes, still need to be discussed. Moreover the

articulation of musical gestalts into successive and simultaneous units will need to be

treated in detail. The Aural Sonology Project has developed detailed analytical

instruments for dealing with all of these dimensions. Additionally, the numerous waysin which form-building isotopies interact remain to be examined. The form-building

isotopies mentioned in this article are basically syntactic; nevertheless, they can

occasionally be interpreted as metaphors for non-musical meanings. Semantically

oriented logics, e.g. narrative schemes, may interact with or override these three

isotopies. Indeed, neither theoretical, nor rational, nor structure-oriented discourses will

adequately and a priori cover the immense field of musical form.

It should be understood that the findings presented here are merely one component of an

inquiry that can probably never be carried to a conclusive end. As a composer I am

immensely grateful that this ultimate end is out of the reach of the theory, as the field of

creation thus remains open, and musical reality will always remain a source of wonder,discovery and surprise.


25/25

In the early 19th century, the musical forms that were more or less spontaneously

created during the 18th century were analyzed and made into normative theory. For a

relatively short period of European music history, musical form was, at the same time, a

spontaneous musical practice and a normative theory. The more advanced composers of

the 19th century were, however, already developing formal conceptions that had by then

bypassed theoretical dogma. In ways that were not explicable, new musical forms oftenmade sense to the unprejudiced listener, not through their conformity with normative

conventions that existed in the listeners minds prior to hearing the music, but because

of the intrinsic logic of the sonic gestalts. The listeners were made to marvel at the

discovery of rational forms that eluded conceptualization. The rational syntax of the

music emerged to the listener as the music unfolded, quite independently of the

listeners preconceived notions of conventions for musical forms. The present approach

focuses primarily on such emergent musical forms.

The dissolution of tonality and the wish to avoid trite clichs has led composers and

theorists of the 20th century to become concerned with musical morphology. Modality,

polytonality, atonality and spectrality have been explored and explained. Moreover, thedesire to include new sonorities and textures in music (e.g. complex spectra, glissandi,

sound accumulations) has made it necessary to conceive of completely new

relationships between sound qualities and overall shape. However, the need to come to

grips with the new musical materials and their technique has allowed the discussion of

technical aspects of music production to monopolize the theoretical discourse on

contemporary music.

By conceptualization and objectification of certain emergent, form-building musical

gestalts, the present article has tried to give focus to possible patterns of musical order at

the level of musical form as heard. When a musical form makes sense, music enters the

mind of the listener, and this act of internalization is a prerequisite for the listeners act

of further making sense of the music: When coherent musical gestalts are formed and

internalized with the listener, they may in turn be understood in iconical and indexical

ways. In the examples above, we saw one clear example of this, when the formal

function offission was used to symbolize sheep that had gone astray (Figure 29).

We have insisted on a blindfolded approach to analysis i.e. not using the score

during the process of making the analysis; this is one essential, though not exclusive,

way of accessing the musical phenomenon. Through this approach we hope to stimulate

and crystallize patterns of musical thinking that are sufficiently close to music for it to

be helpful for the reflected musician and composer. At the same time it represents afresh approach and a challenge to traditional academic approaches to musical theory and

analysis.

An Approach to the Aural Analysis of Emergent Musical Forms

Documents

Transcript of An Approach to the Aural Analysis of Emergent Musical Forms