Ksana: Compositional Control of Spectral Fusion As a Parameter of Timbre Functionality

Ksana: Compositional Control of Spectral Fusion as a Parameter of Timbre Functionality

Anthony Tan

SCHULICH SCHOOL OF MUSIC

McGILL UNIVERSITY, MONTRÉAL

April 2015

VOLUME I: Text

A thesis submitted to McGill University In partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

ABSTRACT

This thesis proposes a compositional model for approaching timbre as a parameter of music able to contribute to the experience of tension and release, which I define as timbre’s functional use. Its aim is to unify concepts of timbre perception and timbre composition such that composers might be better able to understand and control the role of timbre as a structuring force in their work. Specifically, the thesis proposes the synthesis and application of the psychoacoustic concepts of Spectral Fusion, Auditory Scene Anal- ysis, and Sensory Dissonance, as dimensions of timbre functionality.

This thesis divides into two volumes. Volume I offers a written text that describes the theoretical and compositional approaches utilized in the composition, Ksana I, for large orchestra. Volume I further divides into three portions. Part I describes historical concepts of timbre and its compositional and functional use. Part II provides a theoretical basis, and proposes an additional model of controlling timbre functionally. Through an analysis of Ksana I, part III illustrates the use of this model in conjunction with previous approaches to timbre composition. The main topics of the analysis comprise timbre representation, the horizontal and vertical organization of timbre, micro-temporal control of timbre, and multidimensional timbre functionality. Volume II contains the full score for

Ksana I. The composition divides into seven individual sections each representing a different compositional approach to timbre. With a duration of twelve minutes, the work is scored for 2(picc).2 (eh).2 (bcl).2(cbsn)–4.1.3.1–2 perc.–harp–strings (10.10.8.8.4).

RÉSUMÉ

Cette thèse propose un modèle compositionnel pour aborder le timbre en tant que paramètre musical pouvant contribuer à l’expérience d’un rapport fonctionnel entre la tension et la détente. Dans le but de permettre aux compositeurs de mieux comprendre et contrôler le potentiel structurant du timbre dans leur travail, cette thèse prend en considé- ration aussi l’aspect perceptif et compositionnel de ce paramètre. Plus spécifiquement, la thèse propose une synthèse et une application de concepts psychoacoustiques telles que la fusion spectrale, l’analyse de scènes auditives (Auditory Scene Analysis), et la dissonance sensorielle sur le plan fonctionnel du timbre.

La thèse se divise en deux volumes. Le premier volume consiste en un texte qui décrit les approches théoriques et compositionnelles utilisées dans l’œuvre Ksana I, pour grand orchestre. Ce premier volume se divise en 3 parties. La première partie décrit les concepts historiques liés au timbre et à son utilisation fonctionnelle. La deuxième partie fournit une base théorique et propose un modèle supplémentaire pour contrôler la fonc- tionnalité du timbre. La troisième partie, par l’analyse de Ksana I, illustre l’utilisation de ce modèle en rapport avec des approches préexistantes de la composition des timbres. Les sujets principaux de l’analyse incluent la représentation du timbre, l’organisation horizon- tale et verticale du timbre, le contrôle microtemporel du timbre et une fonctionnalité mul- tidimensionnelle du timbre. Le deuxième volume consiste en la partition complète de

Ksana I. La composition est divisée en sept sections distinctes, représentant chacune une approche compositionnelle différente du timbre. L’orchestration de la pièce, d’une durée de douze minutes, est la suivante : 2(picc.).2(cor angl.).2 (clar. bs.).2(cbsn.)–4.1.3.1–2 perc.–harpe–cordes (10.10.8.8.4).

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Firstly, my sincerest gratitude goes to my doctoral advisor, John Rea, whose original support brought me to McGill to pursue graduate studies. He has been a continued source of guidance during the writing of this dissertation. Through our weekly composition meetings over the past years, I believe I now have the necessary tools to confront and forge my own path within the music composition world. Secondly, my deepest gratitude goes to my second doctoral advisor Stephen McAdams who has, through many discus- sions, offered numerous new compositional ideas and shaped much of the way I understand music and sound. The enormous world of psychoacoustics has been an important aspect of my development since my arrival at McGill. In addition, I would also like to thank Mark Andre and Franz Martin Olbrisch, for their guidance during the compositional phase of this work.

I would also like to extend my thanks to the Dresdner Philharmonie and conductor,

Dominik Beykirch, for the first performance of this work. As well, my deepest gratitude goes to KlangNetz Dresden for providing this unique opportunity.

Lastly, this thesis is dedicated to my parents. It has been their continued love and support that has allowed me to pursue a musical path. This privilege is not lost on me, and I am very conscious of all of the gifts that have been provided by them.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

The following terms are used extensively throughout the text. A brief definition of each is provided here in order to facilitate discussion.

Auditory Image – A mental representation of a sound entity that may be considered co- herent in its acoustic behavior and in its perception. This term has also been described as a “Sound-object” within the Acousmatic School of composition.

Drone – A drone represents a musical direction where a single chord, or pitch continu- ously sounds with limited variation.

Form-bearing Dimension – The psychological experience of a musical structure irrespective of notation and intellectual intention. A musical dimension may bear form if it can be organized, recognized, and compared mentally with other configurations. One might also speak of form-evading dimensions, qualities of music that are not recognized or even distort the psychological experience of structure.

Formant – This defines spectral peaks of the sound spectrum often due to the physicality of the resonating cavity, and sometimes referred to as acoustic resonance.

Functionality - In music, this refers to the organization of structures / parameters to ful- fill some predefined role, often related to expression. For the purposes of this thesis, expression connects to experiences of tension and release.

Fusion – For this thesis, fusion suggests a perceptual process whereby two or more units group into a perceived, indivisible unit. Spectral fusion refers to a simultaneous grouping into the same auditory image, the components, and dimensions of a complex sound spectrum. This term may also be referred to as integration and its opposite may be disintegration, which represents the parsing of the components of a complex sound source into separate components.

Multi-dimensionality – This defines having or involving several dimensions or aspects that contribute to the emergence of an overall experience / form.

Sound Envelope – An important element of timbre that represents the amplitude characteristics of a sound through time. It is often separated into three portions: the attack, sustain, and release of a sound. Attack transients represent changes occurring before the sound reaches a steady-state intensity. Sustain refers to the steady state of a sound, and the release represents the time period in which it fades to silence.

Sound Object – A sound-event possessing a basic perceptual and temporal unity, containing characteristic features that can be verbally described. From a perceptual point of view this connects to the concept of Auditory Image.

Tension and Release – In music, tension represents the perceived need for relaxation or release created by a listener’s expectation. Pattern processes controlled by the composer may set up this feeling of expectation.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Overview: Volume I: Written Text Part I – Historical Timbre Part II – Theory and Proposition Part III – Application and Analysis Volume II: Musical Score

VOLUME I

ABSTRACT ...... ii

RÉSUMÉ ...... iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... iv

GLOSSARY ...... v

INTRODUCTION...... 1

Description...... 1 Original Contributions...... 1 Organization...... 3

PART I

HISTORICAL TIMBRE

CHAPTER 1 – Timbre: Definition and Structure...... 6

1.1 Introduction...... 6 1.2 Defining Timbre...... 6 1.2.1 Origins ...... 5 Helmholtz...... 7 Standard Definition...... 8 1.2.2 Perceptual Views...... 9 Perceptualization and the Timbre Paradox...... 9 Multidimensionality...... 9 Synthesis and re-synthesis...... 13 1.2.3 Aesthetic Definition...... 14 Acousmatics...... 14 Timbre Emergence...... 14 1.3 Timbre as Compositional Structure...... 15

1.3.1 Carrier versus Object...... 15 1.3.2 Origins and Precursors...... 16 1.3.3 Logical and Categorical Organizations...... 19 Klangfarbenmelodie...... 19 Musique Concréte...... 20 Musique Concréte Instrumentale...... 21 1.3.4 Synthesis and Analysis...... 22 Synthesis...... 22 Elektronische Musik...... 23 Spectralism...... 23 1.3.5 Timbre and Texture...... 24 1.3.6 Universal Approaches...... 25 1.4 Conclusion – Timbre - in vitro – in vivo...... 26

Chapter 2 - Timbre Functionality...... 28

2.1 Structure versus Function...... 28 2.1.1 Tension versus dissonance...... 29 2.1.2 Criteria for approaching functionality...... 30 2.2 Historical Approaches...... 31 2.2.1 Linguistic / Semiotic...... 31 Semiotics...... 31 Timbre Hierarchies...... 32 2.2.2 Gestural...... 33 Spectromorphology...... 34 Embodied Music Cognition...... 35 2.2.3 Extension of Harmony...... 35 Spectral Functions...... 36 Sound-Noise Axis...... 36 Non-harmonic Progressions...... 37 2.2.4 Cognitive...... 38 Timbre Analogies...... 38

PART II

Theory and Proposition

Chapter 3 – Theoretical Basis...... 42

3.1 Proposition...... 42 3.2 Spectral Fusion...... 42 3.2.1 Definition...... 42 3.2.2 Fusion Parameters...... 44 3.2.3 Spectral Parsing...... 46 3.3 Auditory Scene Analysis...... 48

vii

3.3.1 Definition...... 48 3.3.2 Sequential and Simultaneous Grouping...... 49 3.3.3 Musical Timbre and Auditory Scene Organization...... 51 Timbre as a cause of segregation...... 52 Timbre as a result of fusion...... 53 Timbre as musical form...... 54 3.4 Sensory Dissonance...... 55 3.5 Synthesis ...... 56 3.6 Fusion Paradox...... 58

Chapter 4 – Proposition of Compositional Model...... 61

4.1 Adaptation...... 61 4.2 Fusion Parameters...... 63 4.3 Fusion Continuum...... 64 4.4 Timbre Arrays...... 65 4.4.1 Bi-dimensional Array...... 66 4.5 Fusion Arrays...... 67 4.5.1 Fusion Prototype...... 68 4.6 Compositional Implications...... 68 4.7 Didactic Examples...... 73 4.7.1 Example 1a – Synchronicity and Proximity – “parallel motion” .. 74 4.7.2 Example 1b – Synchronicity and Proximity – “contrary motion”.. 75 4.7.3 Example 2 – Modulation Streams...... 76 4.7.4 Example 3 – Spatialized Spectrum...... 77 4.7.5 Discussion...... 78 4.8 Timbre as a Vertical Process...... 79 4.9 Conclusion...... 80

PART III

Application and Analysis: Ksana I for Orchestra

Chapter 5 – Conceptualization, Structure and Material...... 82

5.1 Introduction...... 82 5.2 Compositional Objectives...... 82 5.2.1 Poetics...... 82 5.2.2 Approaches to timbre...... 83 5.3 Overview of Form, and Other General Considerations...... 84 5.4 Material – General Considerations...... 95 5.4.1 Initial Source...... 95 5.4.2 Representation – Computer Assisted Orchestration...... 96 5.4.3 Temporal Considerations...... 97 Temporal Categories...... 97

viii

5.4.4 Temporal Map...... 101

Chapter 6 - Timbre: Horizontal and Vertical Structuring...... 103

6.1 Introduction...... 103 6.2 Horizontal Organization...... 103 6.2.1 Reconsidering Timbre Melody (klangfarbenmelodie)...... 103 6.2.2 Timbre Cross fades...... 105 6.3 Vertical Organization...... 106 6.3.1 Timbre Impulses...... 106 Typology of Impulses - Schaefferian Categories...... 106 Micro-temporal Dimension...... 110 Timbre Isorhythm...... 112 Timbre ‘Grammar’...... 112 6.4 Texture: Vertical - Horizontal Integration (an example)...... 113

Chapter 7: Timbre: Functional Applications...... 115

7.1 Introduction...... 115 7.2 Attempts...... 115 7.2.1 – Attempt I (mm.81 – 94)...... 115 7.2.2 – Attempt II (mm. 191 – 116)...... 118 7.2.3 – Attempt III (mm. 131 – 182)...... 121 7.2.4 – Discussion...... 123 7.3 Summary and Criticisms...... 124 7.4 Afterthought...... 126 APPENDIX...... 128 BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 129

VOLUME II Full Score:

Ksana I For Orchestra

Instrumentation...... i Performance Instructions...... ii Full Score...... 1

INTRODUCTION

Description

Ksana I, an orchestral composition with a duration of twelve minutes, represents the first in a triptych of works exploring compositional aspects of timbre and temporality.

The focus of my doctoral research centers on the compositional use of timbre in a functional manner, able to produce varying levels of “tension” within a musical work. As such, this thesis explores numerous models of timbre functionality, followed by a proposition of a perceptually informed model of timbre function, aspects of which are then applied to the musical composition.

Original Contributions

The original contribution of this thesis is the synthesis of models found in psychoacoustics and timbre perception research and their application towards a compositional model of timbre function.

Objectives: Why Timbre?

My principle objective is to understand the manner in which a composer can control timbre functionally in order to generate varying levels of tension and release. The perception of the movement between tension and release may be considered an important aspect in the perception of musical form (McAdams 1999). Traditionally, composers have achieved tension and release through the control of pitch / harmonic (tonality) and rhythmic structuring (beat and agogics). With the growth of timbre-orientated composition, however, we lack a clearly defined approach to timbre function. The shift from considering timbre as a carrier of pitch and rhythmic information, towards timbre as the primary object of musical meaning, presents many compositional challenges. The perceptual

nature of timbre constrains the strict parametrical control of timbre, as its alterations must be perceivable. Therefore a functional model of timbre developed from the parametrical control of timbre parameters must arise from a perceptual point of view.

Application of Psychoacoustics to Music Composition

As timbre functionality must be perceptually approached, the compositional application of psychoacoustic models represents an important aspect of this work. One may consider psychoacoustics as the study of the relationship between the physical properties of sound (acoustics) and the observer’s subjective description of the sensations resulting from the sound. Therefore, I will apply to compositional thinking three psychoacoustic concepts related to timbre perception:

Sensory Dissonance – A term coined by Helmholtz (1877) providing a

sensory basis of dissonance relating to the ‘roughness’ and ‘beating’ that

occurs due to the amplitude fluctuations generated by spectral components

of sound that fall within the same auditory filter in the inner ear. Sensory

dissonance may be considered a physiological form of dissonance separate

from syntactic dissonance, whereby dissonance occurs due to predefined

contextual rules.

Auditory Scene Analysis – A model of auditory perception developed by

Albert Bregman (1994), whereby the auditory system organizes sound into

perceptually meaningful events and streams. As sound reaches the human

ear as a whole, the signal must be analyzed into its individual ‘parts’. As

such, auditory scene analysis processes allows us to distinguish between

multiple sources within an acoustic whole. Timbre has been shown to have

a strong effect on both the concurrent and sequential components of Audi-

tory Scene Analysis.

Spectral Fusion – This concept relates to the concurrent organization as-

pect of Auditory Scene Analysis. Coined by McAdams (McAdams 1982),

whereby multiple partials of a complex sound spectrum, analyzed by the

ear, group together to form a single auditory image. Each fused spectrum

may be thought of as arising from a single source. An example may be a

violin timbre, as we do not hear the individual partials of its spectrum, but

rather the perceptual result of the harmonic partials fusing together. Fu-

sion, in a sense, results in timbre, as it represents the perceptual description

of a fused auditory event or stream.

Organization

This thesis divides into two volumes, a text portion, and a musical score. Volume

I further divides into three parts. Part I explores the received views of musical timbre. In

Chapter 1, I present timbre’s paradoxical definition and explore timbre as a multidimensional musical structure and the manners in which composers have utilized timbre as a structuring aspect of their work. Chapter 2 explores functional approaches to timbre with an overview of various historical approaches.

Part II of the dissertation presents a perceptually informed model of timbre functionality. Chapter 3 describes the psychoacoustic models of Spectral Fusion, Auditory

Scene Analysis, and Sensory Dissonance and their relevance to timbre function. Chapter 4 proposes a compositional model of timbre functionality synthesized from these psychoacoustic models as well as the conceptualization of timbre as a vertical process of music.

Part III provides an analysis of the musical work. Chapter 5 presents the compositional objectives and overall structure of the work. I describe the development of the original material for the composition as well as the use of the computer assisted orchestration tool, Orchidée. I also present the temporal considerations of the work. Here, I define three primary temporal categories: metrical, chronological, and morphological and their deployment throughout the work. Chapter 6 details the organization and structuring of timbre from both horizontal and vertical perspectives. Finally, with Chapter 7, I demonstrate the deployment of my compositional model of timbre function within the musical composition. Issues and possible new avenues of exploration are also discussed. This leads to Volume II of the thesis, the musical score.

PART I:

HISTORICAL TIMBRE

Chapter 1

TIMBRE: DEFINITION AND STRUCTURE

1.1 Introduction

This chapter provides a brief overview of various concepts relating to the definition and compositional structuring of timbre. Timbre varies greatly in its definition.

Therefore, it would be important to present these various views in order to achieve a global understanding of the concept. The second part of the chapter discusses the historical compositional uses of timbre as the primary structuring element. One might argue that a divide exists between approaching timbre as an object of study and its aesthetic compositional use. This chapter closes with a discussion addressing this particular divide.

1.2 Defining Timbre

1.2.1 Origins

The word timbre originates from the Greek root typtein, meaning to beat or to strike. It later referred to physical instruments such as a Greek ‘kettledrum,’ tympanon, in

Latin a ‘tambourine,’ tympanum, or in 17th century France, tymbre, for a hammer struck bell. By the late 17th century a more modern definition arose, but aligned with the human voice, as the voice was considered capable of producing different tymbres (Fales 2005).

Not until 18th century France did timbre’s modern definition as a separate quality of sound, differing from pitch or rhythm, emerge. In 1716, Philippe de la Hire wrote:

One must distinguish the sound that is formed by the encounter of two sonorous bodies which clash in the pitch which it has in comparison to another pitch of the same nature.1

1 “On doit distinguer le Son que se forme par la rencontre de deux corps sonores qui se choquent d’avec le ton qu’il a en le comparant à un autre ton de la même nature.” (Fales 2005, 1)

Rousseau’s Dictionnaire de musique (Rousseau 1768) may be considered the first to describe timbre metaphorically as, “that quality of sound by which it is sharp or soft, bril- liant or dull, dry or sweet”2 (Rousseau 1768).

Helmholtz

Helmholtz’s seminal work, On the sensations of tone as a physiological basis for the theory of music (1885), may be considered one of the first to describe timbre from a psychophysical point of view. This theory asserts that a difference in timbre of complex tones depends upon the strengths of harmonics of the tones. Using Ohm’s (1843) acoustical law, whereby the ear performs a Fourier analysis on a complex periodic waveform,

Helmholtz asserted that a complex tone consists of harmonically related sinusoids whose strength of their amplitudes determines the quality of a tone. Moreover, during normal listening situations, this complex of sinusoids fuses within one's conscious perception.

Helmholtz makes a strong distinction between musical sounds and noise. Musical sounds derive from musical instruments whereas noise often represents natural sounds, such as the splashing of water or the rustling of the wind. The difference arises from considering musical sounds as having a periodic waveform and noise sounds, a non-periodic waveform. Periodic tones contain oscillations that “constantly return to the same condition after exactly equal intervals of time” (Helmholtz 1885, 8). Thus, the individual sinusoid components of periodic/musical tones correspond to the whole-numbered harmonic series. Conversely, waveforms that continually vary in their oscillation and contain frequency components that do not correspond to whole numbered multiples engender inharmonic or noise sounds.

2 “...cette qualité du Son par laquelle il est aigre ou doux, sourd ou éclatant, sec ou moelleux.” (Rousseau 1768, 528)

Since the time of Helmholtz, numerous problems have been identified with his theorem. His attention focused on steady state tones, neglecting temporal descriptors of natural tones. Since most natural signals dynamically change over time, this may be seen as a limitation in Helmholtz’s theories. Further, the distortion of the spectrum does not affect the recognizability of the timbre. For example, musical instruments can be recognized as such, even through a very poor recording (i.e. distorted spectrum). Risset and

Wessel (1999) assert that the re-synthesis of timbres from their spectral description fails to produce the actual instrumental timbre they describe, meaning that purely spectral descriptions of timbre are inadequate. Also, methods of sound manipulation reveal that temporal alterations of timbre strongly affect tone quality. For example, Schaeffer dis- covered that the removal of the attack portion of a sound envelope alters timbral quality and its ability to be recognized (Schaeffer et al. 1967).

Standard Definition

Currently, the standard definition of timbre comes from the American National

Standards Institute which defines timbre as that “quality of sensation in which a person can judge two sounds, having the same pitch and loudness, as different” (ANSI 1973).

This characterization presents, however, a ‘negative’ view of timbre, defined as some- thing that it is not - pitch and loudness. It is notable to compare this definition of timbre to the 1716 definition provided earlier from Philippe de la Hire. Both definitions rely on describing timbre in terms of perceived differences when other sound qualities such as pitch and amplitude remain constant. As well, in both cases there lacks a direct timbre- specific word or description of timbral qualities.

1.2.2 Perceptual Views

‘Perceptualization’ and the Timbre Paradox

Unlike frequency or amplitude perception, timbre perception cannot be associated directly with any specific physiological mechanism. Rather, as a perceptual product of multiple dimensions, timbre perception arises from what Cornelia Fales defines as a distributed perception, since it does not arise from a single dedicated mechanism (Fales

2002). Timbre might universally serve to identify sounds in the environment; its definition arising from an evolutionary function whereby catalogues of environmental or culturally conditioned sounds assist humans in negotiating their surroundings. We do not however necessarily perceive timbre from its acoustic features, since there exists a large degree of pre-attentive listening. According to Fales (2002), “any cognitive operation or feature that contributes to the perceptual outcome of a signal beyond the actual acoustic elements of the signal,” leads to a perceptualization of timbre. Yet we use this information to define our environment. As the acoustic stimulus and the perceived stimulus may conflict, for Fales, this amounts to a timbre paradox, as we identify environmental timbres through a perceptual coloring.

Multi-dimensionality

Unlike other musical structures, timbre cannot be described using dualistic language constructs. For example, descriptions of pitch revolve between high or low, duration between long or short, dynamics between loud or soft. Considered as a multidimensional parameter, timbre must be defined with multiple parameters and continuums.

Sethares (2005) proposes the following subjective rating scales for timbre:

Dull ßà Sharp Cool ßà Warm Soft ßà Sharp Pure ßà Rich Compact ßà Scattered Full ßà Empty Static ßà Dynamic Colorful ßà Colorless

While serving to describe perceived qualities of timbre, these continuums represent subjective nominalizations, and do not correspond to measurable physical properties.

Additionally, timbre may be defined within a multi-dimensional timbre space.

Multi-dimensional scaling involves gathering subjective similarities between pairs of complex sounds, measuring subjective distances that are then mapped as points in a multi-dimensional space (Plomp 1970; Grey 1977). Timbre space provides a notion of the perceptual relationships between different timbres. The dimensions of timbre space relate to independent audio correlates of timbre. To determine the spatial position of timbres, researchers perform dissimilarity tests on pairs of timbres, where pitch, loudness, and duration are kept constant. Listeners respond to the degree to which two timbres relate to each other. From this, individual instrumental timbres can be mapped to a multidimensional timbre space, whereby their proximity denotes their similarity.

The axes of the space represent one-dimensional attributes that capture temporal, spectral, spectrotemporal and energetic properties. Also known as audio descriptors, such parameters may be considered timbral dimensions whose combinations give rise to the emergent property we define as timbre. Some of the more prominent independent timbre attributes include:

1. Spectral Centroid – This represents the relative distribution of high and low fre-

quencies in the spectrum and often corresponds to brightness or the center of

gravity of a timbre.

2. Logarithm of the attack time – This corresponds to the spectrotemporal duration

of the attack portion of a timbre.

3. Spectral Flux – This attribute represents the degree of spectral movement around

the spectral centroid over time.

4. Spectral Deviation – This measures the degree of ‘jaggedness’ of the spectral

shape.

In addition to these descriptors, one must also refer to the specificities of a timbre. Speci- ficities describe the individual, unique characteristics of instrumental or synthetic timbres. They may be considered to represent features that distinguish a sound from all oth- ers within a particular context (McAdams 2013). For example, this may include the sound of the action of a harpsichord, the pedal noise of a piano, or even the spectral envelope of a clarinet. Specificities, in combination with the other independent audio descriptors, contribute to a holistic description of a timbre.

Timbre space deals with perceptual relationships between pairs of timbres and makes no a priori assertions about the physical or perceptual structure of timbre

(McAdams 2013). Earlier attempts of this approach equalized important musical parameters such as pitch, loudness, and duration in order to isolate timbral attributes, the reason- ing being that slight inequalities in these three physical factors would affect dissimilarity judgments made by listeners and wouldn't necessarily be related to timbre. For example, a slight mistuning in pitch might be considered a timbre alteration related to brightness

and dullness (Grey 1975). Nevertheless, musical assertions from timbre space should be weighed against the presence of relative musical parameters such as pitch, duration, and loudness, since they pose questions as to the perceptual robustness of multidimensional scaling in musical conditions. As such, recent approaches to timbre space have weighed pitch variations with respect to timbre. Marozeau and de Cheveigné (2007) found that differences in pitch affect timbre in two different ways. Firstly, they assert that large differences in pitch made it difficult for listeners to focus only on timbre. Secondly, that changes in pitch generally affect the spectral centroid, or brightness of a timbre. Handel and Erickson (2001) also found that listeners had difficulty extrapolating the timbre of a sound across large differences in pitch. They further proclaim a rule of thumb: the bandwidth for timbre invariance is one octave. When moving beyond an octave, the listener begins to perceive differences in timbre.

From this research the musical use of multidimensional scaling of timbre presents many cues and challenges. A general cue that can be extrapolated concerns pitch vari- ances larger than an octave and how they directly affect our ability to notice timbre, thereby imposing a pitch restriction when dealing with “timbre as object” composition.

This probably accounts for the prevalence of drone-based music in association with timbre composition where one seeks a perceptually continuous yet micro-variable timbre construction. In relationship to orchestration, we may assert that timbre varies in conjunction with pitch and dynamics for a given instrumental timbre, and therefore care with regard to register and dynamics becomes crucial for the success of an orchestration.

These assertions, however, pose a problem with respect to compositional saliency.

Contemporary composers often play between different compositional strategies within

the same piece; at times they may present pitch-based strategies or rhythmic strategies, and at other times they consider timbre as their primary structuring element. Timbre space might be limited to the use of the latter scenario or at least to timbre-oriented compositions that severely restrict pitch and dynamic qualities. Furthermore, in certain compositional frameworks, it might be desirable to have pitch and durational elements considered completely independently of timbre. In this case using timbre space, as a compositional tool, may be limited, since pitch, registration, and dynamic factors might be considered bound to timbre. Much musical complexity arises from the decoupling of musical parameters and processes.

Synthesis and Re-synthesis

Risset and Wessel (1999) explored timbre through what they define as a perceptual model as opposed to a physical model. A physical model mimics the physical mecha- nisms that give rise to timbre. In the perceptual model, however, the resynthesized timbre need only perceptually resemble the original sound. Here, timbre represents a perceptual by-product, since the re-synthesis model may not be congruent with the actual causalities of the original timbre.

For this approach, a timbral analysis estimates the salient parameters of the timbre model. Secondly, execution of the model from the calculated timbral parameters, re- synthesizes a version of the original timbre. Finally, the use of a ‘goodness-of-fit’ evaluation technique to determine the comparability of the analyzed timbre and the synthesized timbre assesses the success both of the model and the parameters chosen to estimate the original timbre. This approach provides insight and understanding into the relevant perceptual parameters of timbre. It also leads to a simplified representation of timbre elimi-

nating nonessential physical factors (Grey 1975). These models can then be used to perform compositional transformations on the original sound.

1.2.3 Aesthetic Definitions

Acousmatics

It was Pierre Schaeffer in the mid 20th century who first conceptually divorced sound from its source to only speak of timbre’s perceptual qualities. Acousmatic listening requires the listener to divorce the sound from its causal relations, reducing sound to hearing alone (Schaeffer et al. 1967). This notion arises from a phenomenological idea that the listener pays attention to the content of perception rather than to the physical object or cause responsible for the perception. Schaeffer presented the concept of the objet sonore, or sound object, which represents a temporally defined perceptual object of timbre. Using a technique called écoute réduite, or reduced listening, a constantly repeated sound alters one’s perception, thereby divorcing it from its causality and source. Reduced listening thus allows a listener to perceive and identify the perceived qualities of a timbre.

Timbre Emergence

Many composers also define timbre as an emergent property from multidimensional parameters. In Timbre et causalité, Claude Cadoz (1991) asserts that the multidimensional relationship between the timbral object, and the musical effect, gives rise to an emergent quality defined as timbre. As such, timbre arises not only through source identification but also through its gestural and environmental effects, and its relationship to notation and compositional structuring. Similarly, for Pierre Boulez, timbre may be defined as an emergent structure from the interplay between instrumentation, lan-

guage, and compositional manipulation (Boulez 1987). Philippe Manoury, in Les limites de la notion de “timbre” (Manoury 1991), discusses how our conceptualizations of timbre are inversely related to our perceptual appreciation. The limits to which Manoury refers are the difficulties in cross-domain mappings of timbral attributes. For him, timbre’s multidimensional nature makes it difficult to be mapped to any single one parameter, such as pitch or harmony. Rather, timbre emerges from a delicate interplay of pitch, duration, and intensity. Gérard Grisey connects timbre to temporality claiming, “by definition, we will say that sound is transitory,” (Grisey 1987). Timbre defined from a temporal point of view, emerges from the spectro-temporal properties of sound. Here the morphology of a timbre denotes form, leading to a tension between the material of composition and its diachronic structuring force.

1.3 Timbre as Compositional Structure

1.3.1 Carrier versus Object

Robert Erickson (1975) distinguishes two roles for timbre - that of carrier or of object. Representing the prevalent use of timbre in western classical music, timbre as a carrier serves as a vehicle for variations in pitch and rhythm. In viewing timbre as an object, however, timbre becomes the primary structure of musical information. This accounts for a music that relies less on variations of melodic and rhythmic structures but rather, leads the listener into the condition of timbre listening whereby variations in timbre parameters provide the principle listening focus.

The composer Lasse Thoresen also distinguishes between note-based and sound- based music (Thoresen and Hedman 2007). He challenges the notion that western musi-

cology has primarily focused on only three structures: 1) pitch structures, such as harmony and modality; 2) formal structures such as themes, and motives; 3) rhythmic structures, through meter. Conversely, timbre has been given a secondary consideration as colouration through the orchestration of musical structures associated with pitch, formal, and rhythmic elements. With new advances in technology and spectromorphological il- luminations offered by Pierre Schaeffer, Thoresen asserts that we have become enlight- ened to the use of timbre as a primary structuring element of music.

Relatedly, according to Risset and Wessel (1999), western classical music can be approached in two manners. Firstly, it may be approached from the point of view of grammar and vocabulary in relationship to tonality and polyphony. Here the compositional approach focuses on the relationship between the horizontal and vertical organizations of pitch. Conversely, western composition may also project a primordial attempt to renew the musical vocabulary. This view focuses on sonic material itself and the manipulation of the internal elements of sound. Risset and Wessel assert that this approach represents the principle nature of timbre composition.

1.3.2 Origins and Precursors

Instrumental timbre was primarily considered as a delineator of contrapuntal melodies during the Baroque era. Music considered from the point of view of the melodic line did not specify generally the use of a particular instrumental timbre. Timbre remained subservient to pitch, rhythmic, and formal structuring, and was not necessarily considered a fundamental component-object of composition. During the late Baroque, however, composers began writing for specific instruments (and thus a particular timbre) leading to concepts of instrumentation and ultimately, orchestration. Initial approaches to

instrumental sonority did not consider timbre as a network of contrasting and comple- mentary colors, but rather evaluated instrumental sonorities against the standard of the human voice (Dolan 2013). The control of nuances of timbre within the singing tone situ- ated the voice as the definitive carrier for melodic performance. Instruments that could imitate the voice were thus equally prized.

From the Classical to the Romantic periods of music, timbre remained subservient to a strongly hierarchical and rich musical language based on pitch and harmony. As the size of orchestras increased, revealed by an expansion of brass and woodwind sections, an increasing palette for timbre developed. In this sense, timbre resulting from instrumentation and orchestration decisions functioned as a “sign-post” of emotions (Boulez 1987).

In his Grand traité d’instrumentation et d’orchestration modernes (1844), Hector Berlioz elucidates which instrumental timbres may be considered pleasant, sweet, joyous or sad, thereby linking orchestral instruments to specific emotional qualities. Here, Berlioz demonstrates that the proper use of instrumental sonorities is “fundamental to the structure of music; correct composition is impossible without an intimate knowledge of the properties of instruments,” (Dolan 2013, 58).

The emergence of timbre as a compositional object may coincide with the changing functionality of harmony in the early 20th century. At the twilight of the 19th century to the dawn of the 20th century, harmonic function expanded beyond chromaticism. Ta- ruskin (2009) points out that harmonic functionality moved towards a harmonic contextu- ality, where local resolutions of dissonance superseded tonal goal orientation. Thus, perhaps the move towards “timbre as object” composition arose from the final stages of the

functional forces of harmony where non-functional harmonic structures may be considered the proto-realizations of timbre-orientated composition.

Erickson (1975) points to the origins of “timbre as object” composition with

Richard Wagner’s Rheingold (1854). The overture to Rheingold begins with a low drone by eight contrabasses reinforced by a contrabass trombone and contrabass tuba. With no motives, only an arpeggiated E-flat major triad emerges in the other instruments, creating an upward moving orchestral gesture. This textural, ‘drone’ scoring leads the listener from a harmonic/pitch listening condition to a timbre listening condition, and perhaps foreshadows a more modern interpretation of drones by Giacinto Scelsi whose Quattro pezzi su una nota sola (1959), reduces the pitch information to microtonal variations around a central pitch leading the listener towards timbral listening.

Impressionism may also be considered as a precursor to timbre composition.

With Claude Debussy’s Jeux (1912), chords orchestrated for their timbral effect rather than harmonic function suggest an approach towards orchestration as composition itself.

Maurice Ravel’s orchestration of a single melody in Bolero (1928) illustrates the musical variety that can be drawn from the fusion of orchestral/timbral forces. Extending from this tradition, Olivier Messiaen linked timbre and non-functional harmony in Chrono- chromie (1959-1960) such that shifting timbral colors determined the logic behind the harmonic progressions.

Another early proponent of timbre-oriented composition, Edgard Varèse, empha- sized timbre, texture, and space in a self described approach called ‘organized sound’.

Varèse describes his view of timbre in his manifesto, The Liberation of Sound (1936;

1966):

The role of timbre would be completely changed from being incidental, anecdotal, sensual, picturesque; it would become an agent of delineation, like the different colors on a map separating different areas, and an integral part of form. (Varèse and Wen-chung 1966, 12)

Varèse considered sound and rhythm to be primary compositional elements, evidenced by his prevalent use of the percussion ensemble. Works like Ionisation (1931) treat percussion instruments as an ensemble equal in power and expression to that of strings and winds. John Cage’s approach to the percussion ensemble and to the prepared piano further placed importance on inharmonic sound material, expanding the sonic world beyond that of harmony. In Sonatas and Interludes (1946-48), piano preparation with screws and various types of bolts and rubber altered the piano’s natural sound, revealing an approach focused on timbre itself.

1.3.3 Logical and Categorical Organizations

Klangfarbenmelodie

It is my opinion that the sound becomes noticeable through its timbre and one of its dimensions is pitch. … Pitch is nothing but timbre measured in one direction. (Schoenberg 1922, 506)

For the use of timbre as a primary compositional parameter, a logical organization must be achieved. At the end of Schoenberg’s treatise on harmony, Harmonielehre (1911), he suggests the construction of logical timbre structures. Schoenberg asserts that “tone color is, thus, the main topic, pitch is a subdivision,” (Schoenberg 1922). Further, Schoenberg analogously asserts that if we are able to create patterns out of pitches called melodies whose coherence conforms to thought processes, it ought to be possible then to make progressions out of timbre. An example of this may be in his Fünf Orchesterstücke

(1909), where the repetitive use of the “Farben chord” or color chord, evokes a “summer morning by the lake.”

Anton Webern adapts the concept of Klangfarbenmelodie as a linear, sequential construction, assigning different pitches of a melody to different instruments/timbres.

This ‘pointillist’ approach may be exemplified in Konzert für neun Instrumente, (1934).

According to Erickson (1975), the linear approach to Klangfarbenmelodie was perhaps not sufficient. Schoenberg viewed Webern’s constructions of linear timbral melodies as being only a small part of what he conceived, and that in his own work, it is often polyphonic (Erickson 1975). In contrast, Luigi Nono’s Il canto sospeso (1955) provides a non-motivic approach to Klangfarbenmelodie, forcing the listener to observe the timbres themselves, creating a distancing, Verfremdungseffekt.

Musique concrète

Technological advances in the early 20th century further allowed the development of new electric instruments, the recording of sounds, and for the close manipulation of timbre through various studio techniques. After the Second World War, Pierre Schaeffer and the GRM (Groupe de recherches musicales) defined the concept of musique concrète, whereby objets sonores or, “sound objects” serve as the primary timbral ‘note’ of a composition. Furthermore, this method allowed for the use of all sounds, regardless of instrumental or environmental source. Musique concrète involves the compositional manipulation of concrete, recorded sounds on prerecorded tape and not the abstract notation of sound. Schaeffer realized that it was possible to remove all source and causal identification through certain techniques such as removing the attack of a recorded sound or through repeated listening. From this, Schaeffer organized a categorical table of timbre

qualities. The TARTYP, or Tableau récapitulatif de la typologie (Schaeffer 1966), presents a timbre ‘solfège,’ which provided composers and analysts timbral categories with which any sound could be described. This represents a perceptual categorization tool that outlines perceived timbre characteristics irrespective of its source and physical causality.

Schaeffer’s works such as Symphonie pour un homme seul (1949), demonstrate the deployment of this typological approach and the concrète practice.

Musique concrète instrumentale

Helmut Lachenmann, in Klangtypen der Neuen Music (1970), presents his own timbre typology. Proclaiming an approach to instrumental music, musique concrète instrumental, Lachenmann emerged from 1950s post-war serialism with the use of concrete sounds as inspired by Schaeffer, but applied to instrumental music. Lachenmann draws from Schaeffer by similarly structuring material based on the perceived acoustic properties of sound. His Klangtypen divide into five broad categories. Kadenzklang, or sound cadence, represents temporally discrete sound events. Farbklang, or sound color, represents stable sustained sounds. Fluktuationsklang, or fluctuating sounds, represents a timbre with internal movement. Texturklang, or textured sounds, differs from Fluktua- tionsklang in that the internal movement is irregular. The final category, Strukturklang, or structural sound, presents a sound that contains a, ”polyphony of ordered juxtaposi- tions”3. Here, timbre represents a relational entity that cannot be perceived as itself, but rather as a dialectical object of perception connected to contexts and relationships formed within the listener and their environment. Lachenmann’s deployment of these categories

3 ‘”Struktur” läßt sich so definieren als Polyphonie von Anordnungen’ (Lachenmann 1970, 18)

makes use of ‘extended-techniques,’ whereby the instrumentalist performs their instrument in non-conventional manners so as to produce timbral objects of varying quality.

1.3.4 Synthesis and Analysis

Synthesis

The synthesis of new sounds outside of the traditional instrumental context provided a new avenue for timbre composition. Early electronic instruments such as the Theremin

(1921) and the Ondes Martenot (1928) may be considered precursors to this approach.

Synthesizers form a collection of electronic modules that make it possible to control the parameters of timbre thereby producing a sound from rudimentary elements. Synthesis techniques focus on the compositional control of spectral and temporal parameters manipulated to re-create instrumental timbres or for the synthesis of novel timbres. The ma- jority of analog synthesizers utilize subtractive synthesis techniques, whereby filtering techniques alter the spectral components of complex waveforms to produce new timbres.

For example, Morton Subotnick’s Silver Apples of the Moon (1968) represents the use of modular synthesizers built by Don Buchla to create personalized timbres.

Instead of analog circuitry Digital Signal Processing (DSP) techniques create sound digitally, which can then be converted to an analog signal and diffused through loudspeakers. Pioneered in 1957 by Max Matthews, working at Bell Labs, timbre parameters could be controlled through computer programming languages. Digital synthesis techniques include Frequency Modulation Synthesis (Chowning 1977), and Non-linear

Wave-shaping Synthesis (Curtis Roads 1979). Jean Claude Risset’s Mutations (1969) illustrates the use of computer sound synthesis to bridge between pitch, harmony, and tim-

bre. Here, pitches first heard melodically become sustained to create harmony, then fused in order to give birth to timbre.

Elektronische Musik

In the 1950s, the Nordwestdeutscher Rundfunk (NWDR) studio in Cologne con- trasted itself with the GRM and the musique concrète approach by not using recorded sounds as the primary compositional material, but rather, using timbres generated by analog electroacoustic means. The origins of this approach may be traced to that of integral serialism as electronics extended the control of musical parameters to a deeper and more rigorous control of timbral parameters. For example, Karlheinz Stockhausen’s Studie I und II (1953 – 1954), derive the conscious organization of music from the micro-acoustic sphere of timbre itself. Here, pitch is determined by a timbre’s fundamental frequency, and timbre is produced by the relative strength of its overtones in the harmonic series, where rhythm and form derive from the frequency continuum though translated at much slower cycles.

Spectralism

In the later 20th century, the use of mathematical models of timbre in conjunction with psychoacoustic principles resulted in the metaphorical mapping of timbral descriptors to musical parameters and the development of the “spectral school” of composition. Centered at IRCAM (Institut de recherche et coordination acoustique / musique) in

Paris, the analysis of specific timbres for their spectral and temporal content allowed for the mapping of timbral parameters to parameters of pitch, harmony, rhythm and form.

Such attitudes may be found in the works of Tristan Murail and Gérard Grisey, who map the partial characteristics of a target timbre to instruments, creating an “instrumental syn-

thesis.” Gérard Grisey’s series, Les Espaces acoustiques (1974-1985), uses spectral components as an orchestration impetus, whereby the structure of the overtones becomes assigned to the instruments of the orchestra. Tristan Murail’s Désintegrations (1983) further uses processes employed in the electronic music studio, such as ring modulation, applied to instrumental composition.

1.3.5 Timbre as Texture

From the point of view of texture, the compositional weaving of numerous individual lines, however organized, promotes a timbral listening perspective. Here, timbre may be considered to emerge from the grouping or integration of simultaneously sounding musical streams (Bregman 1990). This approach plays with the perceptual boundaries between pitch and noise, and appears under various aesthetic terms such as stochastics, micropolyphony, and soundmass. For example, the stochastic approach in Metastaseis

(1953-54), by Iannis Xenakis, or the mass integral-serialist structures in Karlheinz Stock- hausen’s Gruppen (1955-57), produces a timbral perspective from the amalgamation of large pitch clusters. Other textural approaches to timbre include Györgi Ligeti’s concept of micropolyphony in Atmosphères (1961), where individual interwoven instrumental voices become absorbed into the general texture and lose their identity. In Krzysztof Pen- derecki’s Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima (1959), clusters of sounds derived from extended playing techniques on string instruments produce large timbral sound masses.

These sound masses occur at extreme register placements generating formal structures based on timbre quality.

1.3.6 Universal Approaches

Outside of the western musical tradition timbre represents an important parameter of musical practice. From an ethnomusicological point of view Cornelia Fales (2002) identifies aspects of timbre composition that appear in disparate musical cultures. Fales identifies two general performance styles in relation to timbre composition: Timbral

Anomaly and Timbral Juxtaposition. Timbral Anomaly further divides into two types: extraction or redistribution. Timbral extraction occurs by the alteration of the individual components of a timbre’s spectrum. For example, in the overtone singing of Tibet, the amplification of a particular harmonic leads to a perception of a second sound but without a second source. In contrast, timbral redistribution offers no changes to the original sound but refers to chimeric effects when two sounds fuse to form a third emergent timbre. For example in the Inanga Chuchotée of Burundi, the whispered text and the harmonics of the Inanga (zither) fuse to create a melodized whisper.

Timbral Juxtaposition involves a subtle contrasting of harmonic-structured timbres and formant-structured timbres. Fales suggests that there exists a continuum of timbre structures. On one end of the spectrum, formant-structured timbres contain spectra with several formant bands, or broad clumps of high intensity harmonics. For example, the voice represents a distinctively formant-based sound structure. On the other end of the spectrum, harmonic-structured timbres arise from spectra with a few primary harmonics that characterize the timbre. For example, Fales considers flute sounds in their high register to be primarily harmonically based, since the strength of a few primary harmonics characterizes the timbre. A classical example of Timbral juxtaposition comes from orna- mentation in Indian sitar music where a string is bent towards a target pitch. Here, the

sitar generally produces a formant-based timbre but the pitch bend in the string produces a prominent harmonic that fleetingly rearranges the Sitar’s timbre such that one perceives a more harmonic structure (Fales 2002). This contrast between harmonic- and formant- based structures amounts to a redistribution of perceptualization serving as a timbral compositional device.

1.4 Conclusion – Timbre - in vitro – in vivo

It may be clear that in both the definition and in the compositional structuring of timbre, there exists a divide between considering timbre scientifically as an object of study and aesthetically as an object of expression. In aiming to understand timbre as an object itself, we often isolate it from aesthetic ideas and relative qualities (or at least restrict them) in order to understand it (in vitro). Conversely, as an object of expression, the experience of timbre arises from its subjective musical use in relationship to other musical parameters, cultural connections, and aesthetic intentions (in vivo).

Perhaps this divide relates to the difference between pitch and frequency. Pitch may be considered a metaphor for different frequency positions in space, namely high or low. In contrast, frequency represents an object of scientific study, since sound waves and their oscillations do not necessarily create a pitch. Pitch may also be quantified as frequency, but it does not represent a purely physical property but rather a relative experience of sound.4 Further, pitch may be considered a sensation in which a listener assigns musical tones to relative positions on a scale. Or it may be experienced as a quality of a complex waveform, with numerous frequencies contained within. Therefore, on the one

4 For example, the pitch A is often connected to the frequency 440Hz, but it actually could mean a number of different frequencies depending on historical period and community. Some orchestras even “tune-up” their A to 443Hz or 444Hz in order to produce more ‘bite.’

hand we have the objective measurement of sound, and on the other, an aspect of experience (qualia).

Returning to timbre’s multidimensional definition, timbre may be approached from the objective measurement of numerous acoustic properties belonging to temporal, spectral, and spectrotemporal attributes. At the same time, however, timbre results from the perceptual interactions between these objective measurements, what Fales (2002) describes as timbre’s perceptualization. Thus, timbre itself may be considered subjective.

Though it can be reduced to individual objective measurements, a subjective process colors its multidimensional emergence.

This subjectivity presents a challenge to both composers and scientists. Compos- ers who desire the strict parametrical control of timbre must realize that timbre represents a perceptual quality. Scientists, who aim to understand the objective nature of timbre must realize that timbre is by nature subjective, and thus also a property of aesthetic combinations connecting to history and culture. Perhaps, we should consider the German word for timbre: Klangfarbe, or in a literal translation, sound color. Timbre as a compositional device connects metaphorically as an embodiment of the visual realm. It represents shifts in hues and gradations of spectral light. Although we can approach timbre through measuring its spectral and spectrotemporal descriptors, it also represents the visualization of sound within a culture, whose deployment engenders networks of sensations able to produce a meaningful musical discourse.

Chapter 2

TIMBRE FUNCTIONALITY

2.1 Structure versus Function

The numerous methods of organizing timbre structures reveal very little as to how we may deploy these structures in a functional manner. By definition, a functional structure should serve as a vehicle for expressivity:

Function is the role, or nature of participation, of an event in the import of expressive content and significance; (...) the functional-expressive meaning and substance of the event are its perceived, cognized characteristics (or those presumably intended) and relations to affiliated events in a given work at a given level. (Berry 1976, 23)

For myself, how timbre structures operate within a musical context or paradigm in order to generate varying levels of tension suggests timbre’s expressive role in music. In addition, function may refer to a processive aspect, denoting structural relationships that occur over time. One may, however, suggest approaches to functionality that do not necessarily express tension. For example, succession, recession, stasis, projection, segmenta- tion, and repetition may all connect to functional descriptions of structure used within musical discourse. For the purposes of this thesis, I aim to distinguish between “structuring for organization” and “structuring for expressivity.” This structural expressivity should causally affect the perception of tension. I assert that the cognitive experience and control of tension represents a primary compositional goal for composers. Therefore, variations in tension that different structural patterns engender, regardless of their functional descriptions, presents an approach to timbre that moves beyond solely organization.

2.1.1 Tension versus Dissonance

Tension represents a perceptual quality that serves as a link between the perception of a musical structure and subjective emotional response. Successive tension and release experiences may be common while listening to music (Pressnitzer et al. 2000).

There remains, however, no universal explanation of tension. Increasing tension may be qualitatively described as increasing excitement, or expectation, while the decrease in tension may be described as relaxation, or fulfillment. Moreover, we might separate dissonance from tension. Dissonance may be considered the primary aspect of tension of which we may further define two types: sensory dissonance and syntactic dissonance.

Sensory dissonance may be considered as an absolute aspect of tension as it results from a physical basis. Here, dissonance arises from the sensation of “roughness” when two tones with an interval smaller than the critical bandwidth, sound simultaneously creating

“beats” (Helmholtz 1885).

We may also consider a syntactic approach to dissonance whereby dissonance derives from a context of relationships. In other words, dissonance, and subsequently tension, results from expectation patterns within relative situations and the fulfillment of this expectation brings about release (Huron 2006). For example, in the tonal context the recognition of cadence patterns creates expectation contexts within a hierarchical pitch system. With the aim of finding a satisfactory definition of consonance and dissonance

Cazden (1980) defined it as the movement between stability and instability:

Musical consonance and dissonance are thus functions and not properties of things. As functions, they exhibit a polar opposition. Consonance refers to the stable moment following upon the resolution of dissonance, while dissonance means the unstable moment calling for resolution to consonance. (Cazden 1980, 166)

Cazden does not completely reject sensory notions of dissonance, but rather, considers it as a static, isolated form of dissonance. He postulates that musical dissonance requires a different definition, since it approaches consonance and dissonance as qualities of what the sonorities do rather than on what they are. This represents the very definition of the syntactic approach, in that consonance and dissonance arise from the functions of objects rather than their inherent properties. This definition, however, emerges out of a pitch dominant musical paradigm. The consonance and dissonance of timbre may be an entire- ly different construction altogether, and a phenomenon of primary interest to my thesis.

2.1.2 Criteria for approaching functionality

In Qualities and Functions of Musical Timbre (McAdams and Saariaho 1985), six criteria for approaching functionality are proposed. The authors focus on form-bearing dimensions – aspects of music that can be isolated by the perception of the human mind and not abstract notational structures. This idea connects to timbre as it lacks a clear notational structure. Firstly, one must be able to identify perceivable structures that may be categorized. Secondly, speaking to a syntactic aspect of functionality, these structures should be ordered to induce functionality. Thirdly, these functional relations should be of varied strengths allowing for the building of tension and release. Fourthly, attention to various dimensions of the perceptual structures must be possible. With timbre it should be possible to perceive different timbral dimensions that give rise to variations in functional structure. Fifth, the functional system must reflect the cognitive constraints of the human mind. If timbre structures are to be understood functionally one must be able to perceive their compositional patterning. This presents a difficult aesthetic question as the

‘purpose’ of new music might involve challenging the established perceptual models of listening. Finally, as functional qualities must be retained under various transformations, these functional structures should be robust.

2.2 Historical Approaches

In general, we may divide approaches to timbre functionality into four broad categories: linguistic / semiotic, gestural, an extension of harmony, or cognitive. These categories are not mutually exclusive and many models of timbre functionality involve multiple approaches. Furthermore, the authors of these models do not necessarily use the term,

Timbre Function, but they do address how to use timbre as a form-bearing dimension able to produce varying experiences of tension and release.

2.2.1 Linguistic / Semiotic

A linguistic / semiotic approach either directly uses models from linguistics and applies them to timbre, or though the creation of symbolic representations of timbre structures, engenders a meta-language in order to analyze timbre functions.

Semiotics

An issue with approaching timbre function semantically arises from its lack of a defined notational practice. The written score in classical instrumental music represents a direct ‘stimulus object’ of which an analytical method may be applied (Berry 1976).

Roads and Wieneke (1979) differentiate between iconic and symbolic representations.

Iconic representations utilize shapes and forms that correspond topologically to the physical sound. Listening scores for electroacoustic music tend to be iconic as their drawn

shapes correspond to the heard event structures. These shapes however reveal little con- cerning the functional timbral relationships. Conversely, symbolic representations contain no topographical similarity but represent a conventional perceptual ‘link’. These symbols may be combined into a formal language whose syntactic relationships denote their functionality (C. Roads and Wieneke 1979).

Stéphane Roy in L’Analyse de la musique électroacoustique (Roy 2004) provides a semiotic method for timbre function within the paradigm of electronic music. This approach attempts to unite symbolic analysis with a subjective nominalization of perceived sound objects. Inspired by semiotic approaches derived from Nattiez’s analyses at the

‘neutral level’, one identifies perceptual units of a musical work (Nattiez 1990). Roy then defines a “Functional Grid” with symbols of forty-five functions classified in four main categories (orientation, stratification, process, rhetoric). These symbols can then be assigned to the perceived structures whereby a functional analysis can be performed on the syntactical symbolic relationships.

Timbre Hierarchies

“... the issue of timbre organization is above all a perceptual issue.” (Lerdahl 1987, 136)

In Timbre Hierarchies, Fred Lerdahl (1987)presents a grammar representation model of timbre. Lerdahl asserts that rich timbral organizations can be constructed similar to the organization of pitch and rhythm, which are also synthetic. Inspired by research in generative grammars5 where linguistic structures are motivated by general cognitive processes, Lerdahl aims for a grammatical ordering of timbre.

5 A generative grammar refers to a particular approach to the study of syntax that attempts to define rules that will correctly predict which combinations of words will form grammatical sentences.

Concentrating on hierarchical structuring, Linguistic Parse Trees set up Timbre

Prolongation Structures in which a sense of belongingness or separateness arises from a comparison to a timbral prototype. This timbral prototype must represent the most consonant timbre in any given category and serve as a perceptual anchor similar to the tonic pitch of a diatonic scale. The consonance or dissonance of a timbral prototype arises out of sensory experiences of timbre and occurs in many different forms. For example, a sharp attack may be considered more dissonant than a smooth attack. A relatively brighter timbre, such as an oboe, can be considered tenser in comparison to a bass clarinet. Ler- dahl proposes three types of prolongation structures. Firstly, a strong prolongation occurs through a direct timbral repetition. Secondly a weak prolongation occurs when a timbre derives from a parent timbre. Thirdly a progression occurs with the presentation of a new timbre. From these structures, timbre may be approached analogously to pitch structures where one can create timbral intervals and subsequently timbral scales, eventually devel- oping syntactical rules for timbre function. As such, dissonance and consonance arise from a relational system of timbre structures in relation to a timbral prototype.

2.2.2 Gestural

From the point of view of gesture, tension functions are defined in terms of teleological energy profiles over time. Expectation profiles derive from the suspension and completion of energy trajectories. This assumes a diachronic relationship between timbre structure and timbre function. In most cases, a subjective parsing of timbre structures occurs after which the nominalization of their gestural profiles allows for their analytic or compositional use.

Spectromorphology

Dennis Smalley’s Spectromorphology (Smalley 1997) represents a prevailing gestural approach to timbre function. Spectromorphology refers to how a timbre’s spectrum moves or is shaped over time. In addition, timbral tension may be said to arise from two paths in Smalley’s approach. Firstly, the relationship between a timbre and its physical causality form a cognitive bond defined as Gestural Surrogacy. Smalley identifies five levels of gestural surrogacy. Primal gesture occurs outside of music and connects to direct physical movement. First order surrogacy projects the primal level onto sound in an uncontrolled manner. Second order surrogacy represents traditional controlled instrumental gesture. Third level surrogacy occurs when a gesture can be inferred or imagined in the music alone. Finally, remote order surrogacy occurs when the source-gesture relationship becomes completely ruptured. In this last case, a ‘cognitive-dissonance’ occurs from the severing of causal relations. Conversely, a direct connection between timbre and its causal relations might be said to be ‘cognitively consonant.’ From this, a discourse between varying levels of timbre – source connections engenders functional relationships.

In addition, Smalley identifies spectromorphological expectations, which connect to a timbre’s energy motion trajectory. This divides into three temporal portions, onset, continuant, and termination, and represents temporal indicators whose length determines their ‘gestural’ strength. For Smalley, concepts of gesture and texture, and Motion and

Growth Processes all connect to this temporal energy motion trajectory. Functionally, drawing from Schaeffer’s typologies of sound objects (TARTYP), one performs a subjective nominalization of the qualities of a sound object’s energy motion trajectory. Words

such as emergence, transition, continuation, closure, arrival, and release, provide a manner to identify the functional characteristics of a timbral structure based on their perceived gestural implications. The expectation patterns that these energy motion trajectories create may also be culturally conditioned as we have a strong association to the perceived spectral changes of environmental sounds.

Embodied Music Cognition

Recent trends in psychoacoustics speak of Embodied Music Cognition. Here the body serves as a mediator between heard musical structures and the cognitive patterns that arise in the mind. This approach seems intuitive for timbre-orientated composition as it may speak to primal associations between sound and physicality. Rolf Inge Godøy uses this concept in Gestural Sonorous Objects (Godøy 2006). Also drawing inspiration from

Schaeffer’s typology, Godøy connects the sound object to gestural articulations claiming that timbre perception involves a motor-mimetic component. Here, the perception of sound objects connects to a physical reenactment of the implied causality of these sound objects. Functionally, these sound producing gestures can be subdivided into discontinu- ous, continuous, and iterative excitatory gestures, similar to that of Schaeffer’s typology.

Similarly, the unités sémiotiques temporelles (Delalande et al. 1996) combine both semiotic and gestural approaches, creating a bio-semiotic analysis such that timbre structures are identified and nominalized based on physical energy profiles.

2.2.3 Extension of Harmony

Another approach to timbre function may derive from an extension of harmony.

The roots of timbre composition in western instrumental music may be thought of as aris-

ing from the end of harmonic function. Timbre function might represent a natural extension of a non-functional harmonic syntax.

Spectral Functions

A predominant approach to timbre function from the point of view of harmony arises from the Spectral School of composition. Here, the liminal perception between timbre and harmony suggests that both may be considered the same musical entity

(Grisey and Fineberg 2000). Since timbre itself became the metaphor for harmonic representation, the harmonic and pitch structures employed move beyond tonal and equal- tempered pitch structures to what Tristan Murail describes as frequential-harmonies

(Murail 2000), allowing for the creation of new harmonic functionalities. Thus, since harmony and timbre are considered a single unit, an expanded harmonic functionality in- corporating new frequency components extends to timbre functionality. Consonance and dissonance therefore arise from the modulations between harmonic / timbral structures

(Grisey and Fineberg 2000). As such, the interplay of tension and release becomes articulated through the dichotomy of continuity and discontinuity of perceived timbre structures.

Sound-Noise Axis

In Timbre and Harmony – Interpolations of Timbral Structures, Kaija Saariaho

(1987) defines a sound-noise axis in which harmonic sounds are considered consonant and noise/inharmonic sounds are considered dissonant. The control of timbre in this case extends from the control of harmony. Traditionally the functional aspects of harmony move horizontally over time whereas timbre’s role is vertical in nature. Saariaho aims to bring timbre into the horizontal dimension through this sound-noise axis, which corre-

sponds to metaphorically, a smooth-rough axis. A rough noisy texture equates to dissonance and a smooth clear texture equates to consonance. Saariaho admits this approach is one-dimensional and must be used in conjunction with harmonic and rhythmic qualities.

Non-harmonic progressions

The harmonic approach to timbre function further brings in the measurement of sensory dissonance on harmonic and non-harmonic structures as a means of defining timbral dissonance within a musical work (Parncutt and Strasburger 1994; MacCallum,

Hunt, and Einbond 2005). Composing harmonic progressions of non-harmonic sonorities based upon psychoacoustic parameters represents a primary aim in this approach.

Parncutt and Strasburger draw upon Terhardt’s theory where the perception of harmonic complexes of timbre involves pattern recognition brought about through conditioning and repeated listening of complex tone structures. The two fundamental aspects of

Parncutt and Strasburger’s model correspond to the pitch commonality and pitch distance within timbre structures. Pitch commonality relates to pitches common to successive sonorities. Pitch distance reflects perceived voice leading relationships between successive timbres. These melodic or voice-leading relationships connect to perceived pitch structures within timbral complexes and may be combined to produce a measure of the overall

‘tonal’ relationship between any two timbres. Understanding this relationship will aid composers in the creation of functional progressions of timbral structures. Parncutt and

Strasburger assert, however, that the proportions in which they are combined depend on context, style, and aesthetics.

2.2.4 Cognitive

Timbre Analogies

Timbral space may also be used as a musical control structure where, “subjective space models can propose new paths and new intriguing concepts such as the analogies of timbral transitions creating timbral scales and transpositions” (Wessel 1979). As timbre may also be defined according to its position in a multidimensional timbre space, the distance between timbres in a timbral space may be considered its timbral interval. If this interval becomes treated in the same manner as pitch intervals then one may define timbral analogies such as transpositions and inversion structures (McAdams and Cunible

1992). Further, the movement between multiple timbres within a timbre space might be considered a timbral trajectory, analogously representing a timbral melody. From this, predictive and discursive capabilities of timbre intervals might be obtained such that tension and release structures arise from expectations generated through learned timbral interval patterns.

There are however numerous issues with this. Perhaps a linear organization inher- ently belongs to the realm of one-dimensional parameters. As a multidimensional structure, timbre’s melody cannot be simply a one-dimensional movement over time, but rather a multi-dimensional movement encompassing numerous trajectories. Pitch melodies require constructive organization based upon a system of intervallic relations and tuning systems. The carving out of the frequency continuum engenders intervals that can be transposed, inverted, and reversed. Therefore, when we wish to create timbre ‘melodies’ we are really ascribing a linear transformation to a multidimensional parameter. Multiple continuums exist with a multi-dimensional parameter, perhaps producing a ‘cognitive

constraint,’ whose simultaneous modulations may be impossible to appreciate. One might argue however that merely utilizing a sequential logical organization defines a melodic structure. Therefore a timbre melody need only contain an internal logic to the timbre sequences. Again the question remains as to our ability to hear relational timbral organizations. Krumhansl and Iverson (1992) observed that timbre may be perceived as a situational parameter not relational. Meaning, timbre perception may not be intervallic as analogous to pitch structures but rather, absolute and in the moment. As such, it would be difficult for the composer to develop a musical syntactic system utilizing timbral vectors if relational perception remains illusive. This may seem contradictory to evidence suggested by Wessel (1979), whereby dissimilarity judgments between timbral structures produced relational perceptions. This discrepancy may be partially attributed to the experimental procedures of the two experiments and the interpretation of their results. In

Krumhansl and Iverson, interactions between pitch and timbre were tested in pitch / timbre sequences. They observed that timbre differences could be perceived only when pitch remained constant. However in sequences with high pitch variance, and on the basis that much music contains large pitch variations, the researchers concluded that timbre is perceived more as a situational parameter than as a relational one. In Wessel (1979), the similarity or dissimilarity among pairs of timbres was tested. Wessel concluded that timbre relations could be found, but again only when pitch remained invariant. Thus, we may interpret from these two experiments that, in order for timbre relations to develop, pitch must be kept invariant in order for timbre relations to be perceived. That being said, Ma- rozeau and colleagues found that ratings of dissimilarities on pairs of sounds differing in timbre are only slightly affected by a concomitant pitch change of up to 18 semitones

(Marozeau, de Cheveigné, McAdams and Winsberg 2003; Marozeau and de Cheveigné

2007).

Additionally, timbre intervals may only be possible with synthetic sounds where one can precisely control timbral parameters. This presents a strong restriction for those interested in instrumental music and electronic manipulations of instrumental timbres. As the search for ‘interesting’ sounds represents one of the primary concerns for a composer.

These ‘interesting’ timbres may contain numerous specificities in order for them to be unique, which may render timbral vectors difficult to control since they add an additional dimension not equal to other timbres. Finally, multidimensional scaling often requires a restriction of other musical parameters such as dynamics, rhythmic structuring, and intensity producing ‘unmusical’ situations. Thus, in order to perceive the multidimensional manipulation of timbre one might have to reduce the multidimensionality of music.

PART II:

THEORY AND PROPOSITION

Chapter 3 THEORETICAL BASIS

3.1 Proposition

I propose that a synthesis of the psychoacoustic models of Spectral Fusion, Audi- tory Scene Analysis, and Sensory Dissonance engender a perceptually informed compositional model of timbre function. The manipulations of spectral fusion and scene analysis parameters provide a manner in which to formalize the control of timbre as a tension building structure. In this chapter, rather than to furnish an in-depth review of each topic,

I account for the necessary and specific theoretical knowledge required for my approach.

Throughout the discussion of each theoretical concept, compositional implications will also be discussed.

3.2 Spectral Fusion

3.2.1 Definition

Defined by Stephen McAdams (1982), Spectral Fusion denotes the process by which spectral components fuse together to form a unique auditory image that we define as being a distinct heard timbre. An incoming acoustic signal separates into independent components that vary in frequency and amplitude. As the auditory system effectuates a spectral analysis on this information, an additional process determines whether or not the incoming signal ‘belongs’ to a single source or multiple sources. How the individual components of a signal evolve over time yet maintain a certain causal connection all point to a process of perceptual fusion. For example, if one considers the sound of a flute, we don’t hear the individual even numbered harmonics associated with its spectrum, but rather the fusion of these components into a single object that we then label as ‘flute’.

Jean-Claude Risset (1991) states that the notion of timbre implies fusion as it “corresponds to the sound quality of an ensemble of components integrated in an auditory entity that is assignable to a single source, whether real or virtual.”6

Terms such as blend, and coherence, have also been used to label this process.

Dennis Smalley (1994) prefers the word integration and suggests an integration – disintegration continuum. Integration denotes that, within the incoming auditory signal, “the distribution of spectral components in spectral space, and their behavior over time should not be such that a component or sub-group of components can be perceived as an independent entity,” (Smalley 1994). The continuum between integration and disintegration sets up a spectromorphological space in which composers can co-ordinate between a single integrated timbre and a collection of disintegrated timbres.

Additionally, McAdams (1982) distinguishes between two types of listening: synthetic and analytic listening. Perceiving one fused timbral object may be defined as synthetic listening while perceiving independent spectral components may be termed analytic listening. Ordinary listening may be considered synthetic when we tend to group audio signals from the environment into recognizable objects. Analytic listening however may also be found naturally, as in the case of the spectrotemporal morphology of a gong or bell that reveals its different overtone components over time.

For the composer, the interplay between synthetic and analytic listening situations presents a fruitful discourse. Composers might be able to manipulate, through context or orchestration techniques, whether or not a listener is to hear fused or non-fused timbres.

In an informal experiment (Tan 2014), a fused timbre was segregated into seventeen fre-

6 "La notion de timbre implique la fusion; elle correspond à la qualité sonore d'un ensemble de compo- santes intégrées en une entité auditive et assignées à une même source sonore réelle ou virtuelle." (Risset 1991, 257).

quency bands. After presenting the fused timbre, the independent components were then presented sequentially in different combinations. By doing so, the ear was lead from a synthetic listening situation towards an analytic listening situation such that when the fused timbre was presented again at the end, one could still hear the individual partials.

This suggests that synthetic and analytic listening situations depend upon presentation contexts that can be manipulated by the composer:

Composers can manipulate the pattern context in which spectral structures appear, according to the set of principles which gov- ern the fusion and segregation of partials by the auditory system. (Wright and Bregman 1987, 66)

Erickson (1975) points out that to hear the individual spectral components of wind instruments (an analytic listening situation), the instruments must play completely without any vibrato or frequency modulation. Thus, an orchestrator’s understanding of instrumental articulation parameters and their effect on fusing orchestral timbres directly relates to synthetic or analytic listening.

3.2.2 Fusion Parameters

According to McAdams, Spectral Fusion depends primarily on two factors:

1) Harmonicity of the spectral components 2) Coordinated modulation of spectral components

Harmonicity of the Spectral Components

In general, frequency components that correspond to the natural harmonic series fuse together easier than frequency components that do not. The fusion of harmonic components may be termed as partial phase locking. Non-harmonic spectra may also fuse depending on the arrangement and relative strength of components of the spectrum.

Stretched spectra, for example, have a higher tendency to fuse than spectra that are com- pressed (McAdams 1982).

For a composer, this provides two valuable cues. The orchestration of harmonic structures depends upon the qualities of the harmonies used. Orchestrating harmonic structures that deviate from the harmonic series will tend towards disintegration. Moreo- ver, the fusion of instrumental timbres relates to their harmonic spectrum. Instrumental timbres with congruent harmonic spectra tend towards fusion. Perhaps these rules have been known empirically through history. The orchestration of atonal music, whose vertical structures do not reinforce lower fundamentals, lead to a thinner orchestration. Even the homogeneity of the string quartet largely arises from the similarity in spectral components. Conversely, the resistance of fusion between a violin and an oboe due to spectral differences make it difficult for their employment in small ensemble situations where one seeks timbral fusion.

Coordinated modulation of spectral components

Most natural sounds are not steady-state but rather modulate in frequency. There- fore, a coordination of frequency modulation produces a greater sense of fusion since it maintains a constant ratio of frequency components over time. Without any modulation, analytic listening situations become prevalent where one may discern individual frequency components with greater ease. For complex tones, the coordination of modulation offers an important cue for fusion (McAdams 1982).

This knowledge may be adapted to compositional purposes and decisions relating to the control of modulation in both acoustic and electronic mediums. For example, the use of vibrato has long been known to bring solo instruments to the foreground in the

context of a concerto. Within contemporary music, vibrato usage has less to do with the bringing out of melodic lines but more to do with sound design. Therefore contemporary composers must carefully control vibrato usage if their aim is to create new instrumental combinations out of non-tonal structures. Further, frequency modulation techniques used in electroacoustic music must be considered with regard to their fusion consequences.

Coordination of modulation among tracks within a mixing session would directly affect the overall fusion of the composite mix.

3.2.3 Spectral Parsing

Conversely, the factors that influence the separation of spectral parameters need to be understood since this separation leads to analytic listening situations. McAdams

(1982) suggests three primary factors that affect spectral parsing:

1) Tone onset asynchrony 2) Asynchrony of onset of modulation for different source spectra 3) Temporal correlation among modulations belonging to separate sources

Tone onset asynchrony

This parameter speaks to the disintegration effects brought about through different onset times. Tones that begin together are more likely to be grouped as belonging to the same source. (Bregman and Pinker 1978) found that an increase in asynchrony of the spectral components of a complex tone correlates with a decrease in the tendency for those tones to fuse.

Compositional control of onset synchrony contributes to the control of fusion of complex timbres. This affects compositional decisions relating to the placement of impulses in a metrical structure. For example, placement of instrumental attacks on the downbeat of a metrical structure might have a stronger degree of synchrony compared to

impulses, for example, written on the last beat of a quintuplet. The length of time between onsets must also be considered. In a compositional experiment (Tan 2014), temporal separations longer than 100ms led to rhythmic effects. This suggests a perceptual border between timbral asynchrony and rhythm perception, whereby asynchronies larger than 100ms separate spectral components leading to a perception of rhythmic structures.

Asynchrony of onset of modulation for different source spectra

The auditory system will tend to separate frequency components whose modulations begin at asynchronous moments. Most natural sounds modulate in frequency and this modulation begins simultaneously for all spectral components. When applying modulation to a separate part of the spectrum, this subgroup has a tendency to fuse together becoming a separate timbral structure. This may also be considered a perceptual onset of a new timbral structure.

For a composer this rule suggests that, when building ensemble timbres, articulation techniques such as vibrato or tremolo should have similar onsets in order to support the fusion of the ensemble sound. Conversely, timbres that a composer wishes to separate from the ensemble should commence modulations asynchronously from the rest of the ensemble, a feature that need not apply only to ensemble situations. When composing for instruments that are capable of polyphonic playing such as the piano, guitar, or organ, one could take advantage of this knowledge by controlling the articulation parameters of each line in the polyphony.

Temporal correlation among modulations belonging to separate sources

Not only do the modulations begin at the same time for fused spectral components, but the temporal correlation of modulations will also affect spectral parsing. Spec-

tral components whose modulations do not temporally correlate will resist fusion forming separate timbral structures. Conversely, spectral components whose modulations are temporally correlated will be assumed to arise from one source. This may be utilized compositionally in polyphonic writing. Voices / spectral components can be manipulated to fuse or disintegrate depending on their modulation coordination. As such, the composer can navigate between a single ensemble sound and the interplay of individual weaving lines.

3.3 Auditory Scene Analysis

3.3.1 - Definition

Auditory Scene Analysis (Bregman 1990) exemplifies the second perceptual theory my proposed model employs. Auditory stream formation theory concerns how the auditory system determines whether incoming acoustic information results from one source or from more than one. This theory provides a perceptual process of building separate mental descriptions of the various sound-producing events we hear. The pattern of acoustic energy received by the ears represents a mixture of different acoustic environmental cues. To make sense of this mixture listeners must find relationships within parts of the signal at one time point, and relationships among parts of the signal across time points

(Handel 1993). For example, if orchestral music emerges from one source such as a loud- speaker, we are able to distinguish the different instrumental timbres within the sound complex. With two loudspeakers however we perceive the sound originating from in- between the speakers, even though there exist no physical source at that location. Fur- thermore when in a concert hall, listening to a string orchestra (representing numerous sources) leads us to perceive only one fused complex. These different situations illustrate the need for understanding how the human auditory system groups or segregates compo-

nents of an incoming sound signal. Incorrect groupings, i.e., the grouping of acoustic elements from different physical sources, may cause the listener to hear non-existent sounds assembled by the perceptual system into virtual sources.

Auditory scene organization analogously derives processes from concepts of visual perception in Gestalt psychology, which investigate the creation of visual ‘scenes’. At the crux of scene theory is the law of Prägnanz (Handel 1993), which may be defined simply as elements that belong to a single event contain extremely similar qualities, whereas elements belonging to different events contain extremely dissimilar qualities.

Gestalt psychologists developed numerous principles to describe the occurrence of

Prägnanz [literally, pregnant, pithiness, conciseness]. These organizational principles include: 1) similarity: similar elements tend to be grouped together; 2) proximity: elements close together in proximity (spatial or temporal) tend to be grouped together; 3) continuity: elements that follow the same direction will be grouped together; 4) common fate: elements that move together, group together; 5) symmetry and closure: elements that form symmetrical and closed objects will group together.

3.3.2 Sequential and Simultaneous Grouping

Bregman (1990) outlines two types of grouping cues: simultaneous and sequential grouping. Simultaneous grouping connects auditory data that overlap in time, whereas sequential grouping connects incoming auditory information over time. In other words, simultaneous grouping occurs within the instantaneous moment. To achieve the correct recognition of sources from an acoustic mix, the auditory system must use certain acoustic features in order to determine the adherence of various events. In relationship to tim-

bre, many simultaneous grouping features correspond to the spectral fusion parameters described earlier. An important feature would be, for example, the frequency spectrum of a source. If the auditory system detects that a subset of frequencies derive from the same fundamental, it will tend to treat this subset as belonging to the same source. Conversely, if the acoustic mix contains multiple subsets with different fundamental frequencies, then each subset will group as separate sources. Another aspect of simultaneous grouping relates to the intensity of partials. Spectra tend towards integration if the higher partials are less intense than the lower partials. Electroacoustic composers may use this knowledge as a timbral manipulation tool. A spectral filtering algorithm can control the intensity of different bands of a frequency spectrum. Increasing the intensity of higher partials in the spectrum segments that aspect of the spectrum relative to the overall mix, creating a separate timbral object. Other than spectrum parameters that affect simultaneous grouping may be the synchrony of onsets or offsets, the spatial location of the frequency components, similar patterns of amplitude fluctuation, or the closeness of the spectral components. So-called ‘errors’ in simultaneous grouping may lead to the blending of sounds that should be heard as separate. This, however, might be beneficial to compositional applications of grouping practices, as it plays with the borders of perception, a desirable aspect for ‘interesting’ music.

Sequential groupings represent a diachronic process in which comparisons of spectral content occur one moment to the next (Bregman 1990). In general, a perceptual distance weighted by differences in acoustic dimensions, such as frequency and time, determine whether or not successive events group together into streams. When events be-

come grouped together by the auditory system into a perceived sequence distinct from other occurring sequences, each sequence might be referred to as an auditory stream.

Numerous factors may influence sequential integration. Firstly, spatial location seems to be an important cue. Parts of acoustic signals that maintain a consistent phase, timing, and intensity (all cues for localization) will be perceived as coming from the same source. For a composer this has implications with regard to the placement of timbre within space, especially when composers separate their performers with large distances, or in multi-channel electroacoustic music where sounds are spatialized throughout the hall. As the ‘spread’ of the timbres increases the tendency for the listener to sequentially link timbres decreases. Moreover, the movement of timbre through space must take into account the ability of the auditory mechanism to track timbral streams in order to maintain groupings. (Kendall and Ardila 2008) attempted to define a spatialization vocabulary that takes into account auditory scene processes.

Another parameter relevant to the sequential grouping of timbre might be the brightness of a timbre, or the relative distribution of high and low partials. Extreme differences in brightness can parse timbre sequences into separate streams. Controlling brightness could be effective for the use of timbre as a delineation device, whereby sequences of timbre will stream successfully if timbral ‘units’ contain similar brightness profiles.

3.3.3 Musical Timbre and Auditory Scene Organization

Timbre may create strong effects on grouping in music. The auditory system must determine two things in relationship to timbre. Firstly, which series of frequency compo-

nents that arose over time and originate from the same source should be grouped sequentially into a stream? Secondly, which set of simultaneous components from one source should be fused into a unified timbral structure? Timbre does not represent the automatic perceptual result of a certain acoustic input (Bregman 1990). Rather, timbre results from auditory scene analysis processes. This represents a paradox within timbre perception since timbre influences scene analysis but, at the same time, scene analysis creates timbre

(Bregman and Pinker 1978). To resolve this paradox, timbre may be considered as a property of fused acoustic components. Subsequently, the timbral property of events can be used to determine similar timbres that become integrated into an auditory stream or dissimilar timbres that create steam segregation. Therefore, timbre serves two roles in music: as a cause for segregation or as a result of fusion.

Timbre as Cause for Segregation

Timbre often serves as a cause for segregation in western classical music, since timbre similarities aid the composer in defining and separating the structure of melodies

(Bregman 1990). The uses of timbre within melodies may be deployed with varying techniques. For example, the compound melodic line often found in Baroque music creates two or more lines of melody from a single instrument / timbre. Thus even within a single instrument, stream segregation may occur. Conversely, ‘hocketing’ segregates a single melodic line by asking two or more instruments to rapidly take turns in producing single notes, or short groups of notes from the melody. If the timbres appear different enough the melody will be segregated into separate timbral streams. A more extreme example of this might be associated with Klangfarbenmelodie. Webern’s approach in the first movement of his Fünf Stücke für Orchester (1913) rapidly shifts a pitch melody be-

tween instruments, whereby the rapid changes of timbre interfere with sequential integration.

Timbre as the result of fusion

As previously discussed in the first part of this chapter, musical timbre may also be considered the result of fusion. The creation of new timbres through orchestration or mixing techniques in electronic music must involve an understanding of the auditory mechanism that gives rise to spectral fusion. Historically, chimeric instrumental timbres began to develop as instrumental ensemble music became more prominent. For example, a flute doubling a violin an octave higher, or the bassoon doubling the cello presents a radically different approach to instrumentation, which during the Baroque saw single instruments delineating contrapuntal structures. Bregman writes that, “to know how to compose sonic objects with desired timbres, composers have to understand what makes sounds fuse and in what form the properties of the constituent sounds are preserved in the timbre of the larger sonic object,” (Bregman 1990, 489).

In the art of orchestration, new timbres are created through the timbral blend between two separate orchestral instruments. Sandell (Sandell 1995) describes three types of orchestration with regard to perceptual goals: 1) timbral heterogeneity: where the instrumental timbres remain distinct; 2) timbral augmentation: where one instrument em- bellishes the other instrument, which remains perceptually dominant; 3) timbral emergence: where a new timbre emerges from the fusion of other instruments that cannot be perceptually attributed to an individual instrument.

Blend depends upon two primary factors: 1) onset and offset synchronicity of the partials and; 2) similarity in spectral centroid. Other experiments have aimed to find sig-

nificant blend parameters. Lembke and McAdams (2012) show that formant structures relating to ‘darker’ timbres promote blend in wind instruments. This would also correspond to instrument performances at lower dynamic levels as this attenuates higher formant regions. Understanding these rules impacts orchestration practice and might already correspond to past, established orchestration rules. In compositions concerned with “timbre as object,” however, this research suggests that to achieve a composite fused sound, one should also consider dynamic range, spectral centroid, and formant structure as direct factors of fusion.

Timbre as musical form

Also important for timbre composition would be an understanding of how manipulations to a single timbre would maintain a cognitive coherency rather than introducing the perception of an interjection of a new timbre. This represents an important aspect in electronic music where the spectrotemporal shape of a timbre engenders musical form.

Bregman states: “if the changing of timbre is used to create a musical form, it is important that the parts of the form should have a tendency to stick together,” (Bregman

1990, 484) The perceptual processes involved must be able to track and hold a timbre’s manipulation through time up to a point where timbral manipulation becomes so extreme that the ear recognizes a second source.

This process deals with the compositional modification of a spectral structure. Yet the relative intensity of spectral components relates to the much more complex category of formant structure. It has been shown that the rapid interruption of a formant structure interrupts sequential grouping (Bregman 1990). Thus, it could be suggested that in successive timbres we build a mental structure of the physical causality of the events. When

listeners hear a sequence of related sounds they track the similarities in the physical causality of the sound, pointing to a physical-source model of timbre perception. When we hear and build a mental description of timbre, we are building it not just in terms of its internal qualities but also in terms of the physical properties of the source (Cadoz 2014).

In a succession of sounds, this causality is maintained. Compositional manipulations of spectral structure might alter the individual features of the sound spectrum, but perhaps we are really hearing changes in causality (Bregman 1990). This might represent timbre’s embodiment in the human voice. The vocal chords of the human voice provide the source vibrations, but the vocal tract of the human speaker filters the vibrations giving it a particular resonance.

3.4 Sensory Dissonance

First suggested by Helmholtz (1885), sensory dissonance occurs when two pure

(sine) tones presented at almost the same frequency create constructive and destructive interference patterns between them, and as a result generate a distinct ‘beating’ within the ear. Generally, the beating becomes slower as the two tones move closer together, and disappears when a total unison occurs. Sensory dissonance does not relate purely to intervals between distinct pitches, but also on the spectrum of the timbres used. Since any complex sound may be reduced to a collection of sine waves, different sensory dissonance perceptions may be connected to differences in the partials of complex timbres.

One may therefore speak of a sensory consonance in addition to a sensory dissonance. A sensory consonance arises when one perceives slower beats, since it elicits a sense of

‘smoothness’. Conversely, sensory dissonance arises from faster beatings and might be considered ‘rough’.

Evidence suggests a strong psychoacoustic relationship between the sensation of beating and the perception of musical dissonance (Helmholtz 1885; Bigand, Parncutt, and

Lerdahl 1996). Ernst Terhardt (1974) asserts that “musical consonance” arises from the absence of sensory dissonance and the congruency of a sound to the harmonic series.

Here, sensory consonance/dissonance represents the graded absence/presence of beats and roughness. Relating to a concept of pitch ambiguity, certain spectra evoke clear pitch sensations. Timbres with partials conforming directly to the harmonic series clearly evoke this pitch sensation. Conversely, spectra that deviate from the harmonic series evoke competing, ambiguous pitch sensations. For Terhardt, dissonance represents a negatively valenced sensory experience that arises when sound evokes ambiguous pitch perceptions. Finally, sensory notions of dissonance suggest that individual complex timbres contain an inherent, static dissonance caused by the interaction of partials. This differs from a syntactic aspect of dissonance that arises from contextual relationships between elements. A known critique of the sensory notion of dissonance suggests that it does not capture the functional aspects of dissonance, whereby expectations and fulfillments of resolution occur (Sethares 2005).

3.5 Synthesis

Timbre differences significantly affect both a listeners’ perception of sensory dissonance as well as fusion from a tonal perspective (Sandell 1995). One may ask however: what may be the relationship between the fusion and segregation of spectral components to the perceived sensory dissonance of a non-harmonic, timbral structure? Auditory scene analysis processes do group acoustic information into streams after which auditory roughness is computed (McAdams 2013). Further, Bregman (1990) points out that:

Composers can attenuate the perceived degree of roughness in the same way as they can attenuate the perception of any sort of global property of a mixture, by ensuring that the simultaneous sounds are not assigned to the same auditory stream. (Bregman 1990, 511)

It may be informally observed that much contrapuntal music of the 17th century, such as the fugue, tend to be written for mono-timbral settings. I performed an informal compositional experiment utilizing a four-voice fugue, whereby the four voices were given different timbres resulting in a non-fused overall timbre. The four separate timbres delineated each individual musical line of the fugue. Also observed however was the perception of an overall feeling of attenuated tension. Conversely, when all four voices were then given the same timbre, a spectral fusion occurred resulting in the four lines fusing into a complete timbre. This version maintained a higher feeling of tension as compared to the former segregated structure. I hypothesize that this difference in tension arises from the dispersion of sensory dissonance in the multi timbral version. In the fused version where one timbre was employed, the sensory dissonance calculation occurred on the frequency components as arising from a single source, leading to a heightened sense of tension.

In a more formal experiment utilizing Webern’s orchestration of Bach’s Ricercar,

McAdams and Paraskeva (1997) hypothesized a relationship between sensory dissonance and auditory streaming. Using two forms of the piece, an orchestrated version and a direct piano transcription of the orchestrated version, respondents in this study continually rated the piano version as having a higher degree of perceived tension. The hypothesis was that the lesser perceived dissonance of the orchestral version results from timbre- induced stream segregation. With the single piano timbre, which represents one fused spectral object, sensory dissonance computation occurs on the frequency components of a

single auditory stream. In other words, due to the spectrally fused piano timbre, dissonance arising from the intervallic content of the music was calculated as belonging to one single source. With the orchestral version, timbre differences among orchestral instruments disperse the calculation of sensory dissonance among multiple streams.

Must the measurement of sensory dissonance be quantitative in order to be used as a compositional device? Many researchers, (Parncutt and Strasburger 1994; Sethares

2005), discuss the measurement of sensory dissonance curves as a method of controlling dissonance. The quantitative measurement of sensory dissonance might seem more relevant in dealing with relative comparisons of complex timbres where a progression of individual sensory dissonance levels would engender functional progressions of timbral structures. Rather, one may employ a single timbre and control the segregation and fusion of its partials thereby controlling sensory dissonance and consonance. By employing the concepts of spectral fusion and scene analysis, the separation of a timbre into independent components disperses the calculation of sensory dissonance of a timbral structure across multiple sources.

3.6 Fusion Paradox

The connection between fusion and dissonance is not new. In his Tonpsychologie,

Carl Stumpf (1890) proposed that consonance occurs when two tones perceptually fuse or blend together. Conversely, dissonance results from two tones resisting fusion, literally as dis-sonance (sounding apart). It might seem however that we have a fusion paradox here.

Tonal fusion leads to a sense of consonance whereas spectral fusion leads to a sense of dissonance. Stumpf’s theory of tonal fusion connects primarily to the analysis of pitch

representations of tones and avoids discussing the timbre executing these pitches. Spec- tral fusion on the other hand concerns itself with the fusion of frequency components of timbre structures, whether or not we perceive these frequency components as belonging to single or separate timbres.

Furthermore, Bregman (1990) believes that two perceptual processes of harmonic relations, independent of each other, can account for this paradox. The first process arises from the intervallic relations on the basilar membrane, producing sensations of sensory dissonance. The second perceptual process controls fusion. This represents two distinct processes: fusion depends on scene analysis, and dissonance results from the beating of tones. Stumpf confused this aspect by saying that fusion was the real cause of the consonance as he could not properly distinguish between “heard as one” and “heard as smooth”

(Bregman 1990). For example, one can hear a burst of white noise as being sensory dissonant even though one hears a spectrally fused sound source. Further, a perfect fifth interval dispersed between two sources will have a very different sensory dissonant profile than if the same interval were played by a single source. Thus with spectral fusion, the amount of instrumental blend contributes to the calculation of sensory dissonance of an interval. Stumpf’s tonal fusion did not account for timbre quality and only addressed the perception of intervals irrespective of their sound source.

In a complex timbral structure sensory dissonance results from the combination of partials. Each partial is not intrinsically dissonant. When spectral fusion cues favor a vertical integration, the auditory system treats the combination as a unit, and sensory dissonance may be seen as a property of this grouping. Conversely, the perception of “dissonance can be suppressed when the tones that form the dissonance are perceived as be-

longing to different auditory streams” (Bregman 1990). Non-congruent fusion cues lead to disintegration where one perceives individual spectral components. Thus, by controlling the cues that promote the fusion and segregation of spectral components one may be able to control the perceived dissonance of spectra.

Chapter 4

PROPOSITION OF A COMPOSITIONAL MODEL

4.1 Adaptation

One of the primary goals of this thesis concerns the application of the cognitive models, about which I wrote in the previous chapter, to a compositional model of timbre.

It is important to point out here that the interaction between cognition and musical composition need not be considered as unidirectional. Now while the compositional use of timbre may already take into account such cognitive dimensions, my proposed model serves to formalize this relationship such that spectral fusion becomes an active dimension of timbre composition. In synthesizing the findings from previous theories, the following compositional rule may be asserted:

Compositional control of both spectral fusion and auditory scene analysis parameters will affect whether or not the evaluation of sensory dissonance of a harmonic structure is completed on one source, or dispersed among sources. Thus, depending on the nature of what is being fused, the control of spectral fusion contributes to variations in perceived tension.

When given a harmonic structure with a high degree of sensory dissonance and assigned to complex timbres, such as in orchestration, fusion of the composite timbre into a single blended auditory image will suggest a higher sense of tension, since the sensory dissonance of the harmonic structure will be calculated on a single auditory image. Converse- ly, the disintegration of the complex timbre into multiple auditory images will disperse the sensory dissonance profile of the harmonic structure among sources, leading to a lower experience of tension.

Important to note here: fusion itself does not lead to a higher sensory dissonance.

If one fuses unisons or octaves, one experiences strong consonance. If, however, one fuses dissonant intervals such as a minor second, or major seventh, there is dissonance. Sen- sory dissonance associates with auditory roughness, and it is the separate control of fusion that determines whether or not roughness is calculated on one or more sources. Thus, the two components of my compositional rule, spectral fusion and sensory dissonance, must be carefully connected in order to control the perceived amount of tension.

Furthermore this rule, I suggest, presumes an understanding of the territories between pitch, harmony, and timbre. The musical use of timbre often blurs the lines between these elements since varying musical contexts often manipulate the perceptual relationships that one hears. For example, harmonic components may be orchestrated so as to become timbral structures. Chimeric ensemble timbres may segregate to produce a contrapuntal listening situation. Spectral components of a timbre may be extracted for use as harmonic components. And in employing electronic techniques, spectral components can be manipulated in numerous ways to navigate between countless listening categories.

These different musical situations really represent situations that influence the fusion or disintegration of frequency components. Moreover, they also connect to the concept of synthetic or analytic listening since compositional patterning may alter whether or not one tends towards a unified timbre or separate timbral groupings.

Within a single spectral structure sub-fusions may occur that give rise to multiple perceived timbre sources. Imagine, for example, a single complex timbre separated into two timbres of respectively even and odd numbered partials. These two resulting complex timbres form their own fused structure and have very different perceived qualities. The

former perhaps sounds more like a ‘flute’ and the second more like a ‘clarinet’. Yet when brought together they become a third complex emergent timbral structure containing all the partials combined. Thus when dealing with the fusion of complex timbres one must also negotiate the spectral structure of the individual complex timbres themselves and their resistance or tendency towards fusion with each other.

4.2 Fusion Parameters

Fusion parameters represent compositional parameters that contribute to the fusion or disintegration of spectral components. Synthesizing the work of McAdams

(1982), Bregman (1990), and Shields and Kendall (2004), the following proposed parameters for the compositional control of spectral fusion may be asserted (see Figure 1). The- se parameters divide into two broad categories representing frequency and temporally based fusion parameters.

Frequency 1. Harmonicity of frequency components 2. Spatial and spectral proximity 3. Similarity of spectral centroid Temporal 1. Synchronicity of onset and offset of frequency components 2. Synchronicity of onset and offset of modulation 3. Temporal congruency of modulation Figure 1: Fusion Parameters

The formal manipulation of fusion parameters might be considered important for the functional control of timbre, since their complex interactions alters fusion and therefore sensory dissonance.

Numerous features within this model continue to develop. Since spectral fusion results from the multi-dimensional interaction between these parameters, simultaneous manipulation of all the parameters becomes extremely complex. Further, how these fac-

tors interact, support, or disrupt each other remains unclear. Fusion parameters may be controlled in opposition to each other perhaps creating varying levels of fusion, suggesting a parametrical ‘counterpoint’. Lastly, different parameters might give rise to varying degrees of importance. For example, spectral centroid similarity might be considered the primary dimension for the fusion of auditory sources. The other spectral parameters might be parameters of spectral similarity and not necessarily directly linked to spectral fusion. Such a grouping would imply that the combinations of all of these parameters might not be equal, and might instead be very specific in their contributing force.

4.3 Fusion Continuum

After identifying the fusion parameters, the next step would be to plot these parameters linearly on a continuum, such as follows in Figure 2:

Harmonicity of frequency Components Maximum Spatial and Spectral Proximity Minimum Similarity of Spectral Centroid Synchronicity of onset and offset of Frequency Components Synchronicity of onset and offset of Modulation Temporal Congruency of Modulation Fused Spectrum Non - fused Spectrum (single auditory stream) (stream segregation)

Sensory Dissonance Sensory Dissonance calculated on a single auditory image calculated on multiple auditory images

Figure 2: Fusion Continuum

In Figure 2 on the left, a maximum quality of all the fusion parameters leads to an optimal situation of spectral fusion and therefore a sensory dissonance will be calculated on a single source. Conversely, with the minimum amount of these parameters we would have a non-fused spectrum, and therefore sensory dissonance calculation becomes dispersed among sources. This might seem quite linear in its presentation since fusion pa-

rameters may move in counterpoint with each other presenting various levels of fusion.

Furthermore, fusion can occur in situations that are incongruent with this continuum. For example, many factors including harmonic relations falling outside of the natural harmonic series will prevent the fusion of tones. However if two tones of non-harmonic relations have synchronous onsets and offsets, their similar duration and perceived similar source might keep them perceptually fused. This suggests that the control of fusion parameters such as spectral proximity, harmonic concordance, synchronicity, and spatial proximity, represent independent fusion parameters whose effects might be formally controlled. The fusion continuum merely suggests an optimal binary structure from which we can derive a simple tension – release paradigm similar to the leading tone to tonic (VII à

I) scale degree movements in tonal music.

4.4 Timbre Arrays

The interaction between fusion parameters represents complex multidimensional relationships. Fusion parameters need not be coupled and the independent relationships of parameters might generate varying levels of fusion. In order to approach this complexity one may adopt from Lerdahl’s (1987) Timbre Hierarchies the idea of multi-dimensional timbre arrays. Here sequential levels of difference within one parameter are plotted on separate axes. Each step in one dimension of an array represents what psychophysicists define as a just noticeable difference for that particular parameter. In Figure 3 below, this would represent the array for harmonicity (H):

H0 H1 H2 H3 H4

Figure 3: Harmonicity Array

Each step in the harmonicity array represents a just noticeable increase in harmonicity. H0 represents the least harmonic entity whereas H4 represents the most harmonic.

4.4.1 Bi-dimensional Array

Perhaps it would be beneficial for composers to identify and utilize a limited number of fusion parameters relevant to their musical situation. For sake of the argument, let us assume that harmonicity and synchronicity represent the most important fusion parameters for any specific musical situation. From this, we may then construct a simpler bi-dimensional timbre array (as seen in Fig 4 below) based on these two attributes.

Increasing Fusion

H4 H4S0 H4S1 H4S2 H4S3 H4S4

H3 H3S0 H3S1 H3S2 H4S3 H3S4

H2 H2S0 H2S1 H2S2 H4S3 H2S4

H1 H1S0 H1S1 H1S2 H4S3 H1S4

H0 H0S0 H0S1 H0S2 H4S3 H0S4

S0 S1 S2 S3 S4

Decreasing Fusion Figure 4: Bi-dimensional timbre array - harmonicity and synchronicity

In Figure 4, by plotting the two parameters of harmonicity and synchronicity on separate axis, one creates a bi-dimensional timbre matrix whereby each unit represents varying interactions of harmonicity and synchronicity and therefore fusion. On the Y- axis, moving from H0 to H4 represents an increase in harmonicity. On the X-axis, moving from S0 to S4 represents an increase in the synchronicity of onset of frequency components. Within the matrix the top right unit, H4S4, represents a timbre structure with the highest amount of harmonicity and synchronicity and therefore the highest amount of fu-

sion. Conversely, H0S0 at the bottom left represents at timbral structure that has the least harmonicity and synchronicity and therefore the least fused timbral structure.

4.5 Fusion Array

The movement between the units within this matrix may be considered a fusion array, representing changing levels of fusion. Further, this movement need not be linear since the parameters can be treated independently offering various levels of fusion. A fusion array could be considered a higher order array acting as an emergent property from the manipulation of lower level parameters. Intervals of fusion could be constructed so as to represent a scale of fusion units moving from least to highest level of fusion and therefore from a lower to higher level of sensory dissonance. For the sake of the argument, traversing linearly along the diagonal axis presents a five-unit fusion array, as seen in

Figure 5 below, where each parameter, harmonicity and synchronicity, incrementally change in parallel:

F0 F1 F2 F3 F4

H0S0 H1S1 H2S2 H3S3 H4S4

Figure 5: Fusion Array

Conversely, non-linear movements through the matrix would create rich and diverse fusion structures. Moreover, the fusion array can either represent internal changes to the spectral structure of a single timbral structure, or changes to a group of complex timbres that one wishes to suggest fusion. Timbre structures in the fusion array essentially create a contextual grouping of timbres.

4.5.1 Fusion Prototype

Also important for a composer might be the selection of a psychological prototype

(Rosch 1999). Many perceptual categories contain units that can be considered the most central, or the most representative unit of that category (Lerdahl 1987). A fusion prototype would represent the most representatively fused timbre or sound object within a family of timbres. Moreover, we must be able to remember and recall this prototype so as to compare it to other timbral structures within the fusion matrix. In the fusion array of Fig- ure 5 above, F4 represents this fusion prototype and can be used as a central, pivotal structure to create contextual relationships within a musical work.

4.6 Compositional Implications

This model presents important implications towards the control of timbre within musical composition. Since music, however, also connects to cultural communication and aesthetics, one may question how this model functions within these notions. In one sense, because this model arises from perceptual processes, it deals with principles that may be considered independent of stylistic context, musical syntax, and aesthetics. As such, the perceptual results of this model may be regarded as a higher-order principle that applies to all music, since it operates on the auditory mechanism itself. Understandably, the manner in which a culture responds to the experiences of higher or lesser amounts of sensory dissonance varies according to established cultural contexts and norms. Thus, since I am writing this text and my music within a Western musical perspective, and since we have historically associated higher perceptions of sensory dissonance with increasing perceptions of tension, I take the perspective that this model may contribute to musical structures utilized mainly within Western musical culture.

As a practical step, however, with regard to orchestration and the compositional model, one would need to address the relevant musical approaches that affect each fusion parameter. Fusion attributes must apply to both acoustic and electroacoustic perspectives.

Further, not all of these parameters must be controlled at the same time, since some may be more relevant in different musical situations.

Harmonicity of frequency components

The control of harmonicity with respect to timbre represents a complicated relationship as the territory between a harmonic construction, and the spectral construction of a timbre may be blurred. This connects to the idea of timbre as object or carrier. One must consider if the interplay of timbre through instrumentation and orchestration represents the actual compositional material rather than a timbral ‘coloring’ added after harmonic and rhythmic structuring. For example in a Beethoven symphony, orchestration practice relates more with the coloring of common practice period harmony and the delineation of sonata allegro form. Conversely, Ligeti’s Atmospheres (1961) represents an approach to orchestration whereby the orchestral timbre is the material of the work. The- se categories however may not be mutually exclusive. Ravel’s Bolero (1928) may be thought of as representing both object and carrier uses of timbre. The distinctive melodic line represents a form-bearing element whose orchestration may seem subservient to the melodic construction. At the same time, however, the repetition of this melodic line allows for a greater orchestral / timbre interplay to occur, leading to both a timbre as object situation and a timbre as trajectory situation, since a timbral ‘crescendo’ encompasses the entire piece.

With timbre as a carrier of pitch information, harmonic and compositional lan-

guages whose structures fall within the natural harmonic series will have orchestrations that promote fusion. This arises from a timbral reinforcement of the root note of the harmonic structure. Conversely, orchestrating synthetic harmonic languages whose sonorities fall outside of the natural harmonic series might tend towards non-fusion, since the frequency relationships between the harmonic language and the spectra of the instrumental timbres do not coincide. From the point of view of timbre as object composition, the individual spectrum of the instruments, and how their phase relationships support or interfere with each other, all affect the harmonicity of the overall spectrum and must be considered for fusion.

From an electroacoustic point of view, the use of specific signal-processing algorithms also affects the harmonicity of separate spectral components. Typically, the timbre effects of distortion, harmonizer / pitch shifter, and ring modulation, impact the harmonicity of an individual timbre’s spectrum. As such the use of these signal-processing algorithms must be considered from the point of view of their effect on the harmonic content of the spectrum, influencing fusion.

Spatial and Spectral Proximity

The proximity of frequency components within real space and frequency space directly affects the fusion of frequency components. Within the frequency domain, a large separation between frequency components will tend towards disintegration. For example, an often-deployed compositional technique places the soloist in an ensemble setting an octave or two octaves higher than the rest of the ensemble. By doing so, the spatial distance will aid that player to separate spectrally from the rest of the ensemble. With the concept of spatial proximity, if an instrumentalist can be placed in a distant position sepa-

rate from the ensemble, his or her spectra will resist fusion. Moreover, in sound design practices, the manner with which one ‘distributes’ the spectrum will have effects on the integration and disintegration of a sound. Additionally, spatial distances may also con- strain synchronicity in human performance as extended spatial distances may reduce the ability of the performers to execute in complete synchrony. Finally, inter-aural time dif- ferences7 might also affect the resulting auditory image, since larger spatial distances between sources will affect the timing for the signal to reach either ear.

Similarity of spectral centroid

The similarity of spectral centroid relates to the weighted spectral distribution within timbres. In instrumental music, instruments with similar spectral centroids fuse easier than instruments with different spectral weighting patterns (Sandell 1995). One must also understand how amplitude changes affect the spectral centroid of instrumental timbres. For example, a French horn becomes brighter as its volume level increases.

Lembke and McAdams (2012) found that lower performance dynamics of a follower compared to a leader in wind instruments increases the amount of fusion.

When designing sounds electronically, we must understand the frequency weighting distributions where mixing two sound objects is concerned. Employing filtering algorithms, for example, can alter the spectral distribution of a sound. Attenuating the lower frequency range or boosting the higher frequency range will make a timbre appear brighter, therefore changing its spectral centroid and tendency to fuse.

Synchronicity of onset of frequency components

The control of synchronicity may be divided into two categories: a composed synchronicity and a performed synchronicity. Composed synchronicities create intention-

7 The interaural time difference (or ITD) is the difference in arrival time of a sound between two ears.

al attack profiles such that instrumental onsets or spectral components commence at the exact same moment. Since this represents a temporal parameter, intervals of duration become important. Displaced attack transients greater than 100ms might lead to rhythmic effects not intended for a composition.

Performance-related synchronicities deal with metrical placement of attack onsets.

The higher number of performers that one utilizes might reduce the facility of synchronicity. Further, placement of attacks on downbeats or on offbeats within a metrical structure might have an effect on synchronicity, depending upon the tempo of the passage. For example, a downbeat attack within a 60 beats-per-minute time frame might be more synchronous than if fifty orchestral musicians are required to attack synchronously on the last quintuplet beat of a measure with a tempo of 120 beats-per-minute. An advantage in electronic music might be the strict control of temporal structures within micro-temporal dimensions. Faster tempos can be performed irrespective of the physical limitations of the performers, allowing for a strict parametrical control of synchronicity. Temporal-based signal-processing algorithms further affect the synchronicity of attack. Delay and reverberation algorithms create time intervals between original and reverberated sounds, perhaps affecting the perceived synchronicity of the resulting auditory image. At the same time these algorithms also introduce temporal smearing which may actually enhance fusion.

Synchronicity of onset of modulation of frequency components

Composing synchronous onsets of modulation will suggest a fusion of independent lines. Moreover, a different onset of modulation marks the onset of a new source.

These are features that can be exploited artistically in both acoustic and electronic music.

If a composer wishes to isolate a given voice, then modulation onset should occur at a different moment from the rest of the ensemble. Conversely, having synchronous modulation onsets will push the timbral components towards fusion.

Temporal congruency of modulation

Obtaining congruency of modulation might be hard to control with instruments unless one directly writes out vibrato frequency distances and rhythms. Therefore congruency of modulation between frequency groups should be strictly notated in order to have a direct effect on fusion. Traditionally, vibrato offers an intuitive expressive tool common to string players and vocalists. With electronic music, modulation congruency might be easier to obtain since one has direct control of parameter modulations over time.

The use of automation of vibrato frequency allows the composer to strictly control vibra- to relationships between voices. Further, side-chaining8 allows signal-processing parameters of one track to be directly linked with another, establishing a synchronous modulation congruency.

4.7 Didactic Examples

In the following examples, application of the compositional model in various musical situations can be found. The goal was to demonstrate the manipulation of fusion parameters in order to control the integration and disintegration of frequency components.

Example 1a and 1b deal with the control of synchronicity and frequency separation. Ex- ample 2 attempts to control fusion parameters through symbolic notation structures. Fi- nally, example 3 shows an electroacoustic example dealing with spatialization.

8 Side-chaining uses parameters from one sound for the parallel manipulation of another sound. Often this is done with compressors, gates, and limiters, in order to reduce the amplitude of an audio input waveform when another waveform is played at the same time. More free uses of side-chaining allow one to map modulation parameters (such as amplitude modulation), insuring modulation congruency.

4.7.1 Example 1a - Synchronicity and Frequency Proximity – “parallel motion”

Using in a composition the following dissonant pitch-class set (0,1,2,3,4), each tone will be assigned to a different complex timbre (see Figure 6a below). Using a quintuplet rhythmic structure, synchronicity can be controlled by either placing the attacks of each timbre together on one beat or separated on different beats of the quintuplet. Starting with five separate attack transients, each subsequent measure in Example 1a below corresponds to a reduction in the number of separate attacks and therefore an increase in the synchronicity of the complex tones. At the same time, frequency proximity can be altered by octave displacement of the pitches. In Example 1a, the first measure contains all pitches dispersed within a seven-octave frequency range. The distant pitch proximities then move towards a mid frequency range using a wedge shaped pattern resulting in all pitches combining in a cluster. Each subsequent measure represents an increase in synchronicity and a decrease in frequency distance corresponding to an increase in fusion.

Therefore, in the final measure, sensory dissonance will be calculated on a single source leading to a higher sense of tension in comparison to the first measure.

# of 543 21 Groupings Synchronicity S S S S S Array 0 1 2 3 4

Frequency D D D D D Distance Array 0 1 2 3 4

Bi-Dimensional S D S D S D 0 0 1 1 2 2 S3D3 S4D4 Array

Figure 6a: Example 1a

4.7.2 Example 1b - Synchronicity and spectral proximity – “contrary motion”

Using the same pitch and rhythmic structure, the frequency proximity array was reversed to oppose the process of increasing synchronous attack transients. Perhaps, the effect of this could be a lesser form of fusion. While the increase in synchronicity does group the complex timbres together, the increase in spatial distance of the frequency components resists fusion. This points to a de-coupling of fusion parameters allowing for variations in the amount of fusion, as seen in Figure 6b below.

# of Groupings 54321

Synchronicity S S S S S Array 0 1 2 3 4

Frequency D D D D D Distance Array 4 3 2 1 0

Bi-Dimensional S D S D S D S D S D Array 0 4 1 3 2 2 3 1 4 0

Figure 6b: Example 1b

4.7.3 Example 2 - Modulation Streams

This example uses the mono-timbral instrumental setting of a string quartet with a pitch class set of (0,1,2,3) arranged in a close cluster. Furthermore, I illustrate the use of symbolic timbre manipulation signifiers deployed in instrumental music to induce different levels of sequential streaming and fusion. Segregation of the string timbres can be achieved through controlling dynamics, vibrato, bow placement, and tremolo articulation.

For example, bow placement on different areas of the string affects the frequency distribution of the string timbre, perhaps changing spectral centroid. A molto sul ponticello

(MSP) bow position, produces less fundamental frequency and a brighter and thinner timbre, whereas an ordinary bow position (ordinario) produces a much fuller spectrum. A molto sul tasto (MST) position produces a more ‘hollow’ sound, with little upper partials.

Manipulating these string parameters can affect the stream segregation and fusion of the

four string instruments. String articulations such as vibrato, tremolo, and dynamics, relate to a modulation control of timbre. In Figure 7, each measure corresponds to a different number of perceived components. Measure 1 begins with four separate timbral sources, dissipating the sensory dissonance among four streams. By measure 3 however, all four stringed instruments reveal similar articulations and playing positions, suggesting a single source.

# of Groupings 4321 4 Modulation M M M M M Array 0 1 3 2 0

Figure 7: Example 2

4.7.4 Example 3 - Spatialized Spectrum

The third and final didactic example relates to the use of spatialization in electroacoustic music. Employing a collection of fourteen sine tones with frequencies corresponding to the harmonic series, spatialization techniques separate different portions of the spectrum among five speakers. This suggests a spatialization synthesis whereby the movement of the partials to a single source generates a fused timbre. When the individual spectral components are presented separate among five loud speakers, the sensory disso-

nance profile becomes dispersed. However, in moving towards a single source, or one loud speaker, the sine waves fuse to a single heard timbre, allowing sensory dissonance to be calculated on a single auditory image.

5 2

4 3

# of Groupings 51 Spatial proximity Sp0 Sp4 Array

Figure 8: Example 3

4.7.5 Discussion

These didactic examples perhaps produce many more questions than answers.

They do however attempt the compositional control of fusion parameters, affecting spectral fusion, resulting in sensory dissonance being calculated on one or more sources, which perhaps leads to various experiences of tension. Moreover, they suggest how timbre modifications in both instrumental and electroacoustic music may be used functionally, controlling varying levels of tension within a musical work. Importantly, one may observe how the parametrical control of all fusion parameters could be quite complex especially when decoupling the parameters. This leads to a parametrical ‘counterpoint’ that requires further exploration. Moving the parameters in “parallel motion” perhaps provides the most direct control of spectral fusion. The “contrary motion” of fusion parame-

ters provides an interesting compositional discourse, perhaps producing various levels of fusion.

4.8 Timbre as a Vertical Process

This discussion suggests that an aspect of timbre’s functionality occurs in the vertical dimension. By this I mean that timbre represents a process that happens in time versus over time. Relatedly, DiScipio (1994) suggests that sound design occurs within a micro-temporal dimension. As such, although we may track differences in timbre over time, the emergent property that we call timbre occurs within a micro-temporal interval. Con- sidered in this manner, one may view timbre as resulting from a vertical process in music.

This vertical process occurs from the parametrical control of fusion parameters within a micro-temporal time frame. Experimental evidence for this verticality comes from

Krumhansl and Iverson (1992), who observed that timbre perception occurs as a situational parameter not relational. As such, perhaps timbre functionality cannot be considered relational as analogous to pitch structures but rather, absolute and in the moment.

Therefore, aspects of timbre function occur from the consonance and dissonance arising from spectral and temporal interactions within a micro-temporal time frame. This may refer to the competition between horizontal and vertical forces.

Horizontal forces create the sequential patterns that we hear – pitch order and rhythm. It is the vertical force that creates perceived qualities such as timbre and consonance and dissonance that emerge from the fusion of simultaneous components into a single sound. (Wright and Bregman 1987, 72)

Granted, certain timbres contain extremely long spectrotemporal shapes. As well, time- variant timbral gestures present a diachronic aspect of timbre function. I argue however that this aspect of timbre relates more to a perception of gesture and physical movement.

Perhaps the perception of timbre and sensory dissonance profiles occurs in a moment-to- moment basis where the human auditory system navigates between horizontal and vertical structuring forces. A timbre with a long spectrotemporal shape perhaps may be considered as a series of discrete vertical events that the auditory system has linked together with a gestural profile.

4.9 Conclusion

This chapter suggests an approach to the functional control of timbre through the compositional manipulation of fusion parameters. Much more needs to be studied in relation to this proposition, such as the following: how do fusion parameters interact among each other in creating varying levels of fusion. This outcome might pose problems for a predictable control of sensory dissonance. We also need to define which parameters of fusion could be considered compositionally relevant in different situations. For example, perhaps modulation congruency can be considered more relevant in electroacoustic practices since precise control can be achieved in comparison to a human performance. Final- ly, it should be asserted that since timbre represents a multidimensional attribute, its functionality should also be considered multidimensional. Meaning that in addition to the proposed model, timbre functionality also employs gestural, semiotic, and harmonic approaches. I believe that the compositional control of spectral fusion merely adds another dimension to this complex process.

PART III

APPLICATION AND ANALYSIS: KSANA I FOR ORCHESTRA

Chapter 5

CONCEPTUALIZATION, FORM, AND MATERIAL

5.1 Introduction

The world of timbre-orientated composition provides for numerous compositional approaches. My composition, Ksana I, not only deploys the model of timbre function outlined in the previous chapter, but also reveals how timbre may be structured logically in both the horizontal and vertical dimensions. Furthermore, this piece draws inspiration from historical approaches to timbre composition both in the instrumental and electronic music domains. Timbre as a compositional device need not be limited to a few methods and techniques. Drawing from historical and perceptual perspectives, composers can deploy a rich, multi-dimensional approach to timbre composition.

5.2 Compositional Objectives

5.2.1 Poetics

What is the duration of an experience? The pursuit of this question served as my primary compositional impetus in this project. Using the Sanskrit word, ksana, which signifies an immeasurably short moment, I imagined various representations of ‘moments’ in music. The concept of ksana might be considered literally as a short musical moment, ‘positively’ represented as an impulse, or ‘negatively’ represented as a moment of silence in between musical events. Silence itself may also suggest different representations: specifically where no music occurs, or presentation of steady-state timbral structures. The concept of ksana may also represent an abstract quality of temporality whereby a single ksana could stretch out for an incredibly long period of time. In a sense, the en-

tire musical work itself may be considered a single ksana. Moreover, our living experience could be considered as a series of ksanas, linked together only by our consciousness.

Seen from the point of view of music, this could mean a series of sonic ‘situations’ sequentially connected in time. Finally, the concept of a moment also directly relates to the construction of timbre, whereby the construction of moments connects to the micro- temporal domain of timbre. Occurring primarily in the attack portion of composite instrumental timbres, how one deals with the organization of timbre within a micro- temporal time frame directly affects the resulting timbre / orchestral typology.

This idea of moment in music is not new. Karlheinz Stockhausen originated the concept of moment form in the composition Kontakte (1958-1960). Moment forming relates to the avoidance of an overall line and presents rather a mosaic of individual self- contained musical moments. Stockhausen’s endeavor avoided the normative approach of goal-directed musical discourse and suggested a continuing intensity at each instance within a work. In my approach to the concept of moment, the entire work may be considered a single moment with sub-moments contained within. Thus an overall line or gestalt is not necessarily avoided, but may be considered an integral part of the form of a larger perceivable moment, in which smaller individual moments may be found within.

5.2.2 Approaches to timbre

For my composition, timbre operates as the principle, compositional control structure. This is not say that it is the only compositional parameter. Timbre may be considered as an over-arching musical factor that connects pitch and rhythmic features. As such, it draws upon Schoenberg’s assertion that, “pitch is nothing but timbre measured in one

dimension9” (Schoenberg 1922, 506). Further, I was also particularly interested in what

Erickson (1975) describes as the various territories of timbre. This refers to whether or not one perceives in various listening situations either, “pitch or timbre”, “harmony or timbre”, and “texture or timbre”. By compositionally manipulating factors such as temporal duration, instrumental grouping, and various pattern processes, one may navigate between timbral territories. For example, in the territory between timbre and harmony, an extremely short temporal duration may lead orchestrated harmonic material to be perceived as a timbral impulse, whereby the vertical pitch content only serves as a structuring aspect of timbre. If however the same vertical structure is given a longer temporal duration, the ear may be drawn towards an analytic listening situation where internal harmonic structures can be perceived. Finally, in my desire to synthesize various functional approaches to timbre into a unified work, I suggest a multi-dimensional approach to functionality.

5.3 Overview of form, and other general considerations

Ksana I may be divided into seven sectional ‘moments’, whereby each moment explores a different perspective on timbre and on temporal organization (see Figure 9).

Of the approximate twelve-minute duration, the formalization of the seven structures may be seen as an emergent property resulting from the parametric control of timbral features.

In general, a horizontal and vertical organization of timbre represents the primary structuring element in the work. In addition, different conceptualizations of time provided for various rhythmic considerations. More specifically, a single motivic structure may be found throughout the piece, but that is varied such that reversals, expansions, and com-

9 “Die Klanghöhe ist nichts anderes als Klangfarbe, gemessen in einer Richtung,“ (Schoenberg 1922, 506).

pressions create a rhythmic centering force. Other temporal categories – such as chronological and morphological time families – were deployed to make contrasting temporal layers, where the latter category relates to the temporal quality of timbre. Finally, functionality was considered in a multidimensional way such that certain sections of the work simultaneously deploy different forms of functionality.

Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7

Negative Motivic Texture Filter Reverse Metrical Drones Horizontal vs. Vertical Forces Space Variation Streams Sweep Impulse (mm. 36 - 70) (mm. 131 - 182) (mm.1 - 35) (mm. 71 - 82) (mm 83 - 101) (mm. 102 - 115) (mm. 116 - 130) ca. 1:40 ca. 3:00 ca. 4:00 ca. 0:20 ca. 1:30 ca. 0:35 ca. 1:00 ca. 12 minutes Figure 9: General Formal Outline

Section 1 – Negative Space (mm. 1-35)

In this opening section, I attempted to suggest a concept of negative musical space

(described in 5.2.1 above) through the use of chronological interruptions of a metrical structure, creating a temporal tension between metrical and chronological time surfaces.

Moreover, this section will set up a sequence of timbral impulses, qualitatively designed within the micro-temporal time frame according to Pierre Schaeffer’s (1966) TARTYP10.

Timbral impulses such as these represent a series of ksana ‘moments’. For example, in

Figure 10 one can observe two different types of timbral impulses placed within a metrical structure with an interruption by the chronological time category, which becomes audible through sustained string harmonics in the cellos. A more detailed explanation of the construction of these typological impulses may be found in Chapter 6 on the vertical organization of timbre. The goal for this section: to create a repeatable sequence of timbres that perhaps engenders for the listener a grammar-based model of timbre. Further,

10 TAbleau Récapitulatif de la TYPologie – Developed by Pierre Schaeffer in 1966 to define categories within which any perceived sound could be placed. It presents an approach for a subjective nominalization of timbre based on perceived qualities.

the use of synchronicity as a fusion parameter, impulse placements, and articulations within the metrical structure all contribute to a functional use of timbre.

flz. 8" mit ton #œ œ œ Picc. @ @ & ‰‰ R æJ ÔR . ‰ U ƒ 8" flz. flz. œœ œœ œœ Fl. 1-2 ‰‰ @ @ . ‰ U ‰ & R æJ ÔR œæ ƒ 8" Í Ob. 1-2 & ‰‰ œ œ œ ® ‰ U R J ÔR ƒ 8" E. Hn. & ‰‰ œ œ œ ® ‰ U R J ÔR 8" flz. ƒ

Bb Cl. 1-2 nœ œ œ ‰‰ @ ! ® ‰ U & R æJ ÔR ƒ 8" flz. nur luft B. Cl. ? ‰‰ bœ œ œ . ‰ U ÷ ‰ ï- ‰ @R æJ !R F Ô mundstück abnehmenR ƒ 8" und in das Instrument blasen nur luft Bsn. 1-2 B ‰‰ œ œ œ . ‰ ? U ÷ ‰ ï- ‰ R J ÔR F R ƒ 8" C. Bn. ? ‰‰ r j rK ® ‰ U œ œ œ ƒ 8" flz. nur Luftgeräusch 1-2 ? ‰‰ œ œ œ . ‰ U ÷ ‰ -ï ‰ @R æJ R R Hrn. Ô f ƒ 8" flz. nur Luftgeräusch 3-4 ? ‰‰ bœ œ œ . ‰ U ÷ ‰ -ï ‰ @R æJ ÔR R 8" f flz. ƒ B Tpt. 1-2 b & ‰‰ œ œ œ ® ‰ U @R æJ ÔR 8" flz. ƒ Tbn. ? ‰‰ #œ œ œ ® ‰ U ‰ #&œ ‰ @R æJ ÔR R 8" flz. ƒ &r B. Tbn. ? ‰‰ #œ œ œ ® ‰ U ‰ #œ ‰ @R æJ ÔR ƒ 8" Tuba ? ‰‰ r j rK ® ‰ U #œ œ œ ƒ 8"

hard plastic mallets Perc. I U j r & ‰ ‰ f bœœ œœ. œœ œœ Ped. >œ œ . œ œ

Snare Mute! 8" Woodblock snare on Perc. II ÷ ‰‰with sticks œ œ +œ ® ‰ U hard‰ mallets >Ë ‰ @R æJ ÔR R f 8" n>œ ‰‰ R ‰ j ‰ U & nœ Hp. n œ 8" ç Ï > j ? ‰ bœ ‰ U b >œ

(II) 8" arco batt. arco (III)F 1-6 r h ï r & ‰‰ h@ œ ® ï ‰ U & ‰ nœ ‰ œ R > Vln. I ƒ Ô P (II)ç 8" arco (III)F arco batt. 7-12 r h ï r & ‰‰ h@ œ ® ï ‰ U & ‰ bœ ‰ œ R > ƒ Ô ç P (II) 8" arco arco batt. r (III)F 1-5 @ œ ï r & ‰‰ œ R ® ‰ U & ‰ n ‰ ƒ Ô ï >œ Vln. II P (II)ç 8" arco arco batt. r (III)F 6-10 œ ï r ‰‰ @ ® ‰ U ‰ ‰ & œ ÔR ï & bœ ƒ 8" > ç P arco #h h h h 1-4 # œ œ. œ œ B ‰‰ #œ rK ® U ‰ @R #œ J R Vla. Ø 8" ƒ arco nh h. h h 5-8 n œ œ. œ œ ‰‰ r œ ® U ‰ B @ J R œ ÔR ƒ Ø 8" pizz. arco batt. arco r 1-3 ? ‰‰ r œ ® r ‰ U ‰ ‰ œ@ #>œ nœ ÔR ç P Vc. ƒ 8" pizz. arco batt. arco 4-6 r œ r r ? ‰‰ @ ® ‰ U ‰ ‰ œ R #œ> #œ Ô ç P ƒ 8" pizz. arco arco batt. DB 1-6 r œ r œ ? ‰‰ @ ® ‰ U ‰ ‰ œ R #œ> R ƒ Ô ç P Figure 10: Example of two typological impulses (mm. 19 – 22)

Section 2 – Metrical Drones (mm. 36-70)

To my way of thinking in this section, drones poetically serve as a representation of silence. Drones also allow for the development of a timbre listening situation thanks to their restricted use of pitch and rhythm. Sequences of different timbres represent a type of

‘Klangfarbenmelodie’. Here, utilizing only a single pitch (F) as the initial tonal scaffolding, specific sequences of timbres suggest changing shifts of timbre. Timbre composition in this section activates on numerous levels. Relating to timbre grammar, by using the same impulse sequence of timbres deployed in Section 1, but now displaced at longer time intervals, the vertical timbre structures delineate this section into subordinate sections. Moreover, Section 2 begins with ‘pure’ instrumental articulations but moves towards a greater ensemble sound. Finally, the orchestra moves from a low-frequency range towards a high frequency range, producing an orchestral gesture relating to a diachronic increase in spectral brightness. In Figure 11, an example of a drone construction followed by a vertical impulse interruption is presented.

accel. e = 60 e = 35 #œ. œ. œ. œ Picc. & R ‰‰ Ø f halb luft / halb ton nur luft Fl. 1-2 ‰‰ r j ‰‰ & ï ï f

Ob. 1-2 &

E. Hn. &

halb luft / nur luft halb ton r j Bb Cl. 1-2 & ‰‰ bï ï ‰‰ f halb luft / halb ton nur luft B. Cl. ? ‰‰ bï ï ‰‰ R J f

Bsn. 1-2 >œ œ. ? ‰‰ R Í r C. Bn. ? ‰‰ >œ œ. Í

1-2 ? ‰‰ bœ R Hrn. p

3-4 ? ‰‰ r nœ p

nur Luftgeräusch Bb Tpt. 1-2 ‰‰ ï ï ï ‰ R J R ß nur Luftgeräusch Tbn. ? ‰‰ ï ï ï ‰ R J R ß nur Luftgeräusch B. Tbn. ? ‰‰ ï ï ï ‰ R J R ß nur Luftgeräusch Tuba ? ‰‰ ï ï ï ‰ R J R ß #œ Perc. I & R ‰‰ p

Perc. II ÷ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. æ æ æ æ æ æ æ æ F bœ L.V. n>œ R ‰‰ ? n œ ‰‰ & J Hp. ç p f r j ? ‰‰ bœ ‰‰ Ï b >œ > (II) (III)F 1-6 r ï & ‰‰ ï ï ‰‰ Vln. I ƒ

7-12 h h & ‰‰ œ œ ‰‰ R J (II) f (III) 1-5 F r ï & ‰‰ ï ï ‰‰ Vln. II ƒ r j 6-10 & ‰‰ œ œ ‰‰ f (II) ord. (III) 1-4 F r ï B œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ ‰ ï ï ‰‰ æ æ R Vla. F Ø ƒ

ord. 5-8 B œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ ‰ µ œ œ ‰‰ æ æ R R J (II) F(III) Ø (III) arco fleggiero (IV) F r r 1-3 ? ‰ œ. œ. œ. œ. gliss. #œœ. œœ. œœ pœ œ. Vc. Í f (III) (IV) 4-6 ? æ @ æ gliss. µ µ µ µ . œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œœ œœ >œœ œœ. Í f ß > DB 1-6 ? . . nœ. œœœ œ. œ. œ. gliss. . @ æ ƒ ß Figure 11: Drone and Impulse Construction (mm. 36 – 43)

Section 3 – Motivic Variation (mm. 71-82)

This section presents a momentary approach to the material from the point of view of harmony and gesture. Here, timbre serves as a carrier of pitch and rhythmic information, whereby the orchestration of motivic gestures represents the role played by timbre. Tension, therefore, results from gestural expectations derived from interactions in pitch and rhythm. In Figure 12 one can observe a motivically orientated gesture with respect to pitch, presented in the Violin II and Viola sections.

#œ #>œ œ >œ. œ œ œ œ 1-5 #œ œ j œ œ ‰ œ œ œ & nœ œ. œ œ 3 ƒ sub. 3 Vln. II 6 p ƒ #œ #>œ œ >œ. œ œ œ œ 6-10 #œ œ j œ œ & ‰ œ œ œ nœ sub.œ. œ œ 3 ƒ 3 6 p ƒ pizz. arco œ œ pizz. r œ œ r 1-4 B ‰‰ ‰ #œ œ œ #œ œ ‰ ‰ ‰ œ œ#œ œ. œ #œ œ ç ƒ 6 ç Vla. 6 pizz. arco œ pizz. œ œ 5-8 r #œ œ œ œ r B ‰‰ œ ‰ œ œ #œ ‰ ‰ œ ‰ #œ œ. œ #œ ç ç ƒ 6 6

Figure 12: Motivic Gesture (mm.74 – 77)

Section 4 – Texture Streams (mm. 83-101)

My objective for this section was to suggest and then to obscure the perceptual line between timbre and texture. Here, the weaving of independent musical lines engenders a ‘mass’ effect where one perceives an ensemble timbre. Further, the temporal organization in this section deals less with metrical and chronological temporal spaces, but rather with the morphological shaping of timbre. Timbre functionality arises from the internal control of subordinate textures through parameters that handle articulation. These articulation parameters connect to the fusion parameters of spectral centroid similarity and to modulation congruency. Figure 13 presents three different string textures presented by the string section of the orchestra

5" ord. höchste Note möglich (I) arco batt. Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > gliss. à 1-6 U 3 œ œ . . 2 œ œ œ œœbœ(n œ )œ œ . ÔR ® & 8 . . . . gliss. 8 Í p œ. œ. Vln. I 5" > Í ord. höchste Note möglich Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (I)> gliss. à arco batt. 7-12 U 3 œ #œ . . 2 (b œ ) . R œ œ. œ. œœœ œ. œ. gliss. Ô ® & 8 8 p œ. œ. 5" Í> Í ord. höchste Note möglich (I)> gliss. à arco batt. Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1-5 U 3 œ œ . . 2 ( œ ) . ÔR ® & œ 8 œ. œ. œœ#œ œ. œ. gliss. 8 5" p œ. œ. Vln. II Í> Í ord. höchste Note möglich (I) gliss. à arco batt. Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > 6-10 3 . . 2 U (b œ ) . œ œ ÔR ® & œ 8 œ. œ. œœnœ œ. #œ. gliss. 8 œ œ Í> p . . 5" Í höchste Note möglich (I)> gliss. >Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ à arco batt. 1-4 U 3 ( œ ) gliss. œ nœ . . 2 B œ 8 œ. œ. œœnœ œ. œ. œ. 8 ÔR ® p œ. œ. Vla. 5" Í Í 3 >Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > gliss. 2 arco batt. 5-8 Uœ œ. œ. œœbœ(n œ )œ. œ. œ. œœbœ . rK B . ® 8 8 œ œ. œ. 5" Í Í p ord. Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ gliss. (b œ ) gliss. (IV)> arco batt. 1-3 œ 3 œ. œ. œ œ >œ œ. œ. . . 2 ? u @ œ œ . rK ® #˘œ æ 8 æ æ æ 8 œ R Vc. 5" Í Í f ord. gliss. Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (IV) arco batt. U ( œ ) gliss. > 4-6 œ 3 #œ. #œ. #œ œ >œ œ. œ. . . 2 ? @ œ œ . rK ® #˘œ æ 8 æ æ æ 8 œ R 5" Í Í f > > gliss. arco batt. U 3 Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~( œ ) 2 K DB 1-6 ? #œ #œ. #œ. #œ œ œ œ. œ. œ. œœ#œ . r ® r 8 @ . 8 #œ #˘œ æ æ æ æ f Í Í Figure 13: String textures (mm. 82 – mm. 92)

Section 5 – Filter Sweep (mm. 102-115)

A filter sweep represents a prevalent timbral tension-building device often found in electronic dance music. It generally occurs through a dynamic filtering curve applied to a timbral spectrum (often white noise) such that the frequency spectrum, from low to high, becomes amplified and then reduced or ‘swept’ into an exponential time frame. I aimed to metaphorically represent this sweep through a specific use of the orchestra.

Based on their frequency range from low to high, wind and brass instruments employ a single pitch, added in succession toward a build up of an orchestral mass to metaphorically suggest a filter sweep. This process was used in conjunction with the textural ‘streaming’ of the string section similar to Section 4, where symbolic articulations manipulate fusion parameters. Combining both the control of the integration process and of a metaphorical filter sweep, I aimed further to bring about a multidimensional approach to timbre functionality. A precise explanation of the compositional structuring used in this section may be found in Chapter 7.

Section 6 – Reverse Impulse (mm. 116-130)

The goal of this section was to reverse the standard attack-release gestalt of a sound envelope. Occurring in the winds and brass sections, articulated crescendo ‘hair- pins’ that are followed by a sharp instrumental attack suggest, analogously, a reversed sound envelope. The same rhythmic structure utilized throughout the piece becomes deployed here at its smallest scale, providing a more motivic approach to rhythm. As well, occurring in the string section, the impulses at the end of each hairpin that utilize the same sequence of timbral structures heard in Sections 1 and 2, attempt to create the sense of a recurring timbral grammar. In Figure 14, I present an example of this reverse impulse gestalt construction.

#œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ Picc. & ÔR ® pƒ . . . . Fl. 1-2 #œ œ œ œ >œ & œ œ œ œ œ ® ÔR p ƒ Ob. 1-2 & œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ ® ÔR p ƒ E. Hn. & œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ ® ÔR p ƒ rK Bb Cl. 1-2 & œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ pƒ

B. Cl. ? #œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ ® ÔR p ƒ #œ. œ. œ. œ. œ Bsn. 1-2 ? > ® ÔR pƒ rK C. Bn. ? nœ. œ. œ. œ. >œ ® p ƒ

#œ. œ. œ. œ. œ 1-2 ? > ® ÔR Hrn. p ƒ rK 3-4 ? nœ. œ. œ. œ. >œ ® p ƒ

B Tpt. 1-2 b & œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ ® ÔR pƒ Tbn. ? #œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ ® ÔR p ƒ B. Tbn. ? rK ® #œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ p ƒ

Tuba ? rK ® #œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ p ƒ

Perc. I ÷ œ +œ æRJ ƒ Perc. II ÷ œ +œ æRJ bƒœ œ & ‰ R Hp.

? ‰ r œ œ

arco @ @ 1-6 ‰ œh & œh Vln. I ƒ arco @ @ 7-12 ‰ œh & œh ƒ arco 1-5 œ ‰ œ @ & @ Vln. II ƒ arco 6-10 œ ‰ œ @ & @ ƒ arco 1-4 B ‰ #œ ƒ #œ Vla. arco 5-8 B ‰ @ œ@ ƒ œ

arco 1-3 @ ? ‰ œ@ œ ƒ Vc. arco 4-6 ? ‰ @ œ@ ƒ œ

arco DB 1-6 ? ‰ @ œ@ œ ƒ Figure 14: Reverse Impulse Gestalt (m. 123)

Section 7 – Horizontal versus Vertical Forces (mm. 131-182)

The final section of the piece reflects on the horizontal and vertical structuring of timbre. Making use of a canonic structure often deployed as scaffolding in western instrumental and vocal music, a connection to electronic music emerges since a canon may also represent a delay line used in signal processing. Horizontally, timbral streams are generated as repetitive impulses of specific timbral profiles. Later, vertical timbral structures emerge according to the fusion of individual units of the horizontal lines. As such, vertical sonorities result as a consequence of horizontal structuring, prompting shifting fusion perceptions for the listener. In Figure 15, I present an example of this horizontal / vertical construction in the strings. Violins I and II perform a canonically displaced timbral stream with short vertical bowing gestures. Concurrently, the Double Bass, Violon- cello, and the second half of the Viola sections perform a second canonic structure with an arco ricochet articulation. Finally, the first half of the Viola section adds counterpoint to this situation by presenting a drone structure.

arco leggiero (II) (III)F 1-6 ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ‰ ï ‰ ï ‰ ï ‰‰ ï ‰ ï ‰ ï ‰ ï ‰‰ ‰ ï ‰ Vln. I (II) (III) p F arco leggiero 7-12 ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ‰ ï ‰ ï ‰ ï ‰‰ ï ‰ ï ‰ ï ‰ ï ‰‰ ‰ ï ‰

(II) (III) p arco leggiero 1-5 Fï ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ‰ ï ‰ ï ‰ ï ‰‰ ï ‰ ï ‰ ï ‰

Vln. II (II) (III) p Farco leggiero 6-10 ï ï ï ï ï ‰ ï ‰ ï ‰ ï ‰‰

- gliss. p 1-4 œ. œ. œ. œ œ #œ œ. . . Âœ œ Âœ œ. B œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ œ. Vla. P arco P ricochet 5-8 B ˘œ œ. ‰ ˘œ œ. œ. œ. ‰ ˘œ ® ‰ ˘œ œ. œ. œ. ‰‰ ÔR arco ricochet rK 1-3 ? #˘œ œ. ‰ ˘œ œ. œ. œ. ‰ #˘œ ® ‰ #˘œ œ. œ. œ. ‰‰ #˘œ œ. ‰ ˘œ œ. œ. ® ‰ #˘œ œ. œ. œ. ‰ . . Vc. p arco ricochet sul tasto K 4-6 ? ‰ ‰ r ® ‰ ‰‰ ‰ ® ‰ ‰ ‰‰ ‰ #˘œ œ. ˘œ œ. œ. œ. #˘œ #˘œ œ. œ. œ. #˘œ œ. . ˘œ œ. œ. . #˘œ œ. œ. œ. #˘œ œ. œ. œ. #œ arco p ricochet sul tasto ord. rK r DB 1-6 ? #˘œ œ. ‰ ˘œ œ. œ. œ. ‰ #˘œ ® ‰ #˘œ œ. œ. œ. ‰‰ #˘œ œ. ‰ ˘œ œ. œ. ® ‰ #˘œ œ. œ. œ. ‰ #˘œ œ. œ. œ. ‰‰ ‰ #œ œ. œ œ . p . P Figure 15: Canonic Timbral Streams

5.4 Material - general considerations

What follows is a brief explanation of the spectral and temporal materials used in the work. This discussion will permit us to focus on the organization of timbre and eventually its functional use in the subsequent chapters.

5.4.1 – Initial Source

Numerous composers have explored the use of ‘found’ sounds with regard to compositional source material. In my research, the analysis of acoustic objects for their spectral and temporal qualities generates the primary material for a musical work. My approach: I wanted to synthesize a personal timbre – one that would best represent my timbral aesthetic taste. The initial sonic material for Ksana I derives from a synthesized sound prototype hereby referred to as the Hauptklang (HK). With a duration of eleven seconds and using both recorded instrument sounds and synthesized sounds from a Wal- dorf Microwave XT Synthesizer, the HK arises from the digital manipulation and subsequent combination of the following complex timbres (in Figure 10):

Sound Verbal Description Frequency quality Digital Noise Temporally stretched white noise Complete spectrum

Large Metal Plate Bowed, sustained, metallic, deep, visceral Inharmonic – low frequency

Struck, Multi-textural, high frequency, Metal Chimes Inharmonic – high frequency pure, crystalline

Synthesized Sound 1 Complex waveform, modulation, nasal Perfect fifth – mid frequency

Synthesized Sound 2 Complex waveform, gritty, noisy Single pitch – mid frequency

Figure 16: Initial Timbral Material

These digitized individual sounds were then controlled for amplitude and frequency in order to generate a fused timbral structure. As such, the HK represented a fu-

sion prototype since it could be perceived as a composite timbre from which sub-timbral structures might be segregated.

5.4.2 Representation - Computer Assisted orchestration

The manner with which this sound can be represented in an orchestral medium provides a further compositional impetus. Computer-assisted orchestration methods utilize both found and target sounds serving as compositional input for an automatic orchestration algorithm (Maresz 2013; Nouno et al. 2009). I employed Orchidée11 (Carpentier and Bresson 2010), a computer-assisted orchestration tool, in order to explore various orchestral representations of the HK. This algorithm software suggests pitch, dynamic, and instrumental assignments from an analyzed sound-file. Eight orchestral interpreta- tions (see Appendix 1) of the HK were generated from both symbolic and audio features.

Audio features included the spectral centroid, and the average frequency mean. Symbolic features included the orchestral instrumentation, the articulations, and the dynamic level criteria. However, a question that arose immediately during the compositional process was - why should I trust the algorithm absolutely? With this cautionary sentiment in mind, a ninth orchestration of the HK was developed using only my “orchestration ear”.

In Appendix 1, the nine different representations of the HK may be seen.

11 Orchidée analyzes a target sound-file for acoustical features after which the algorithm compares the analysis to a large database of instrumental sounds and articulations. The result is constrained by psychoacoustic and instrumental criteria. These constraints represent both symbolic (instrument, note, dynamics, articulation) and audio features (spectral centroid, roughness, loudness, harmonic color). An algorithm that takes into account the symbolic and audio feature constraints then calculates optimal orchestrations.

The Orchidée output served as a structural template upon which compositional and orchestral shaping occurred. In a sense, the output itself represents the material of the work since the resulting orchestral representations provide both pitch and instrumental suggestions. Furthermore, Ksana I aimed to approach what composer John Rea describes as prima facie orchestration (McAdams 2013). Since my composition uses timbre as the primary object of musical information, orchestration becomes a part of the compositional process, a condition that is opposed to normative orchestration where instrumental / timbre considerations are made to be subservient to pitch / harmonic and rhythmic structuring. Moreover, notions of timbre blend and spectral fusion became an important aspect of the creative process when building upon the Orchidée output.

5.4.3 Temporal Considerations

Temporal Categories

The definition and control of three temporal categories denotes the compositional manipulation of time. The three temporal categories are:

1. Metrical Time 2. Chronological Time 3. Spectrotemporal Time

The first two categories concern the organization of time on a linear, teleological dimension whereas the final category relates to the temporal organization of timbre. The metrical category refers to the traditional usage of musical rhythm - time signature construction, agogic stresses, and tempi, whereas the chronological category deals with the measurement of time in seconds. The spectrotemporal category pertains to the temporal duration of a timbre’s spectral envelope. I submit that the manipulation and interaction of these three categories engenders various experiences of temporal tension.

Metrical Time

With this category, we understand how metric structure becomes articulated through vertical timbre impulses. The primary rhythmic structure of Ksana I derives from two intuitively designed rhythmic sequences (see Figure 17). The first, labeled as the

Hauptrhythmus (Hr), and the second, as Nebenrhythmus (Nr)12:

Figure 17: Rhythmic Cell

Metrical structures can be divided into metrical or agogic representations. Met- rical representations deploy the rhythmic sequence as a series of time signatures (in Fig- ure 18).

Figure 18: Metrical Representation of Rhythmic Cell

Agogic representations deploy the rhythmic sequence as agogic accents within a single time signature. On each of these accents, a vertical timbre structure is placed (in

Figure 19).

12 The use of the terms Hauptrhythmus (Hr) and Nebenrhythmus (Nr) has been adapted from George Perle’s (Perle 1989) analysis of the operas of Alban Berg.

Figure 19: Agogic Representation of Rhythmic Cell

Finally combinations of the two representations may also be employed. For example, in Figure 20 the Hauptrhythmus is articulated through time signatures but the Ne- benrhythmus, manifests through the use of agogic accents within this metrical structure.

Figure 20 – Combination of Metrical and Agogic Representation

These different representations became transposed temporally at whole number multiples

(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) creating different temporal scales. By doing so, I conceive a continuum of rhythm from a short motivic structure to a formal structure. In addition, the rhythmic cell is constantly repeated throughout the piece and may be considered as a rhythmic wheel (Figure 21). As such, the different speeds at which one turns this wheel, represent the different temporal scales the rhythmic structure is deployed.

Figure 21 – Representation as Rhythmic Wheel

Chronological Time

The chronological aspect of time pertains to the measurement of time in seconds.

By using timed fermatas, Ksana I ‘moves’ into a temporal structure that interrupts the metrical structure, providing moments of ‘real’ time. Within these held chronological

moments, I deploy either static timbre structures or musical silence. A held static timbre structure perhaps prompts the ear toward an analytic listening situation, permitting the listener to hear individual timbre elements. Moreover, the chronological interruptions provide a marker of just how the overall tempo affects the measurement of the chronological time category. I hypothesized that a slower tempo would guide the symphony conductor to count a longer durational second, and conversely, a faster tempo would lead the conductor to measure the chronological second with a shorter duration.

Spectrotemporal Time

The final temporal category may be considered in relationship to timbre. The spectrotemporal category represents the temporal duration of a timbre’s spectral evolu- tion and, traditionally, it divides into four regions: attack, decay, sustain, and release. As a general example, a muted pizzicato on a string instrument exhibits a sharp attack, short decay, short sustain and quick release time, representing a shorter temporal duration. In contrast, a slow rolled crescendo on a Tam-Tam, with a laissez vibrer indication, creates a slow attack, a long decay, long sustain and a long release time that may last several seconds, representing therefore an extremely long temporal duration. Spectrotemporal time can be manipulated in two manners:

a. By the natural temporal duration of the spectral envelope of instrumental timbres. b. By the composition of an orchestral complex that emulates the temporal structure of a sound

The first manner relates to the control of articulation of an instrumental timbre.

For example in Ksana I, at mm. 11, by holding a Tam-Tam while striking it, one would cut its decay time, reducing its temporal duration. A contrasting example can be shown in mm. 45, where the Tam-Tam is allowed to resonate, giving a longer temporal duration.

100

The second manner in which the spectrotemporal dimension can be controlled arises in the construction of orchestral structures that pertain to a chosen sound envelope.

In this sense, orchestration can approach a form of sound-design by which individual smaller timbral structures become vertically combined to produce larger, emergent timbral structures. Since the organization of timbre deals with vertical and horizontal trajectories, Ksana I utilizes a very basic ‘gestalt’ of a vertical impulse together with a horizontal timbre emergence as exemplified in Figure 22.

Figure 22: Basic Gestalt

The vertical impulse represents the attack portion of an envelope and the emergent timbre line represents sustain and release portions. Thus, Ksana I may be considered as a series of composed impulses and resonances. Furthermore, since the duration and position of the attacks may be determined by the duration / scale of the metrical structure, one might say that the metrical temporal category of the work directly relates to the duration of the orchestral spectrotemporal category.

5.4.4 Temporal Map

A temporal map (as seen in Figure 23) shows the organization of various temporal layers over the duration of the piece:

101

Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7

Metrical accel. decel. accel. Temporal Impulses increasing spectrotemporal length 'Unison'

Figure 23: Temporal map

I present a process in which the movement between temporal categories engenders a temporal tension. In Section 1 of the piece, a tension between the metrical and chronological categories arises from the conductor / musicians shifting between metrical and chronological organizations. As well, an acceleration of the metrical structure commences at the beginning of Section 2, moving further away from a chronological time category. As this acceleration unfolds, a longer-lasting spectrotemporal category becomes increasingly deployed, perhaps creating a tension between the morphological and metrical category. Sec- tion 7, the final section, represents a situation where three categories – the metrical

(eighth note = 60), chronological, and spectrotemporal (short non-resonant impulses) – are in ‘unison’, perhaps leading to a temporal consonance.

102

Chapter 6

Timbre: Horizontal and Vertical Structuring

6.1 Introduction

The organization of timbre occurs from both a horizontal and vertical perspective.

The horizontal dimension refers to the sequential organization of timbre, which is connected to timbre’s role in auditory stream segregation where one can trace the diachronic coherency of timbral ‘lines.’ The vertical organization of timbre refers to the integration of simultaneous spectral components and points to an instantaneous or micro-temporal time frame. The design of chimeric / ensemble timbres from the combination of harmonic voicing, instrumental grouping and performance techniques, produces different perceivable orchestral typologies.

6.2 Horizontal Organization

6.2.1 Reconsidering Timbre Melody (Klangfarbenmelodie)

In the pursuit of a logical organization of timbre, numerous methods to determine sequential followings have been suggested. With the assignment of different instrumental timbres to a pitch-based melody, timbre differences become secondary to pitch construction since the varying pitches may confuse the differentiation between pitch and timbre listening processes. Historically, a melody represents a logical sequence of pitch structures. Yet, from my point of view, any logical horizontal ordering may be referred to as a melodic structure. A timbre melody may thus result from a logical sequence of timbral structures.

103

In my approach, timbre differences are executed only upon a single pitch, and in order to maintain a timbre listening situation. Shifting between instruments on the same pitch represents for me intervals of timbre. Furthermore, a timbre melody does not necessarily have to be considered by the composer as the foreground within a homophonic texture. Rather, the logical horizontal ordering of timbres may be used as scaffolding for a rich sound design. Finally, it was not important for me to consider timbral analogies with regard to pitch intervals, such as inversions or retrogrades. My conception of a timbre melody serves as a repeatable structure within Ksana I, hopefully attaching itself within the memory of the listener.

Method

From the Orchidée output, the most frequent common tones were extracted from each vertical structure. The most recurring tone of the output was an ‘F’. Allowing for a bandwidth of three quartertones within the ‘F’, all the pitches from E ¼ tone sharp to G ¼ tone flat were isolated. Orchidée output #7 did not have any of these pitches, therefore it was not utilized in the final composition. More importantly, since each ‘F’ links to a specific timbre from the Orchidée output, we obtain a collection of eight instrumental timbres and timbre combinations (see Figure 24).

123456789

Figure 24: Isolated Common Notes

104

Subsequently, as each common tone occurs in different octaves, I chose a desired gestalt in order to shape then reorder the sequence of the common pitches based on their octave placement, and their associated timbres, through time (see Figure 25). The black wedge on the left represents the desired frequency shape for the timbral melody.

9 6248315

Figure 25: Shaped Sequence of Common Notes

This timbral sequence of pure instrumental tones represents a basic timbre melody presented throughout Ksana I. It served as a horizontal organizing principle from which further orchestration decisions could be made.

6.2.2 Timbre Cross-fades

A second type of horizontal organization was deployed for primarily percussion timbres. Here, the two players perform strict regular impulses while cross-fading with each other with different percussion timbres. As one percussionist slowly attenuates his / her amplitude, the second percussionist emerges with a second instrumental timbre. This produces a case of timbre morphology, and provides for me an attempt to design a

‘rough’ spectral flux. There are two occurrences of this as shown in Figure 26:

Tam-Tam Temple Block Bass Drum

Figure 26: First Inharmonic Timbre Sequence (mm. 45-81)

105

This represents an ongoing movement from metal to wood to skin percussion instruments. A longer example may be seen from mm. 131 to the end of Ksana I. The transformation embodies wood to skin to a pitched spectrum to an inharmonic spectrum:

Xylophone + Woodblock Bass Drum Snare Xylophone Gong

Figure 27: Second Inharmonic Timbre Sequence (mm. 131-182)

6.3 Vertical Organization

6.3.1 Timbre Impulses

Also related to the original concept of ksana – the ‘moment,’ the vertical dimension represents structures that are organized as impulsive events. Thanks to the Orchidée output, not only does the sequence of common tones imply a specific sequence of timbres, it also implies a sequence of harmonic-instrument complexes that will continually repeat throughout the work, the model for which appears in Figure 28.

964831 25

Figure 28: Harmonic Sequence

Typology of Impulses - Schaefferian Categories

Since the Orchidée output only serves as an initial impetus for further compositional work on my part, I needed to produce different timbral typologies through the or-

106

chestration of the impulsive harmonic complexes. Using the typological categories of timbre derived from Pierre Schaeffer’s Typology of Sound Objects (Schaeffer et al. 1967),

I manipulated the harmonic timbre complexes to have specific typological qualities, as seen in Figure 29.

Figure 29: Typology of Sound Objects (Schaeffer 1966)

Concentrating on the primary nine categories (N, X, Y and their derivatives), I defined a sequence of thirteen timbre typologies (see Figure 30). In short, N represents a pitched-based unit, X represents a noise-based unit, and Y represents a variable pitch

(glissandi) unit. A unit with a single prime symbol (e.g. N’) represents an impulse; a unit with a double prime symbol (e.g. N’’) represents an iterative structure; and a unit with no prime symbols represents a held or tenuto structure. Finally, combinations of these units were arranged in order to create more complex typological units, such as shown in Figure

30.

X'Y' X'N N' X'Y' X' X'Y' N' N''Y'' N' N'' N' Y'' X'

Figure 30: Typology Sequence

These differing typologies provide timbral information for the articulation of the harmonic-instrumental impulses. Coming from the point of view of “timbre as object” composition, the harmonic structures (see Figure 28) merely provide certain pitch information in order to construct the timbre impulse, and not all of the pitches had to be employed. In Figure 31, the first harmonic-instrumental impulse is provided by the following typology: (X’Y’). This corresponds to a noise-based impulse that also contains a glissando element. To achieve this typology, I imagined that smaller timbral elements could combine to create a larger composite timbre. For the violins and violas, bowing vertically along muted strings with an aggressive bow pressure produces a noise-based impulse with a glissando element contained within. The lower strings (cellos and contrabasses) perform a Bartok pizzicato on a fundamental frequency of F, in order to create a sharp attack to the composite timbre. The flutes and clarinets perform a “tone-to-air” technique, providing another noise quality that commences with a small amount of pitch. The bassoons add a C, the second partial of the lower fundamental, in order to give the composite timbre some harmonicity. Percussion I adds a Tam-Tam strike that is allowed to resonate giving the composite vertical structure resonance. Following this, a high pizzicato ‘C’ from the harp, also a partial of the contrabass fundamental, adds an upper partial to the composite timbre. Finally, Percussion II strikes claves, giving a high-pitched noise element. This approach demonstrates an attitude towards orchestration as sound design, whereby individual instruments become utilized and deployed for their ability to contribute to a larger intended timbral structure.

108

Harmony

Figure 31: Typological Orchestration (mm. 4-5)

109

As one can hear, the harmonic information offered by the Orchidée output serves as the pitch and instrumental basis for an impulse that is orchestrated according to specific typological criteria. This output was used freely in order to serve a timbral perspective, since, according to me, pitch information is deemed subservient to timbre organization.

Micro-temporal Dimension

The vertical organization of timbre also relates to the micro-temporal dimension.

The control of the micro-temporal family occurs primarily in the attack portion of the spectrotemporal envelope. Here, the synchronization of individual frequency elements influences the perceived timbre structure. From an orchestral point of view, each individual and complex instrumental timbre contributes to the construction of a larger complex orchestral timbre. As such, the control of synchronicity within the micro-temporal domain of these individual timbre impulses affects their fusion into a single heard orchestral timbre. This micro-temporal dimension may be controlled in two manners:

a) Written rhythmic structures within an impulse or, b) Psychologically, by the beat placement within a meter.

These two techniques are used extensively throughout the first section of Ksana I. The first method utilizes written-out rhythmic structures to articulate varying attack dimensions. A single impulsive attack produces a different timbre perception than if one constructs an impulse ‘cloud’ through a fast rhythmic repetition. This becomes particularly perceptible when using a large number of musicians, such as in orchestral music. In Fig- ure 32, two impulse types are shown for the string section, a triplet impulse ‘cloud’, and a single attack impulse.

110

5" arco batt. arco batt. 3 1-6 ‰‰ U r ‰ & ˘ p #œ œ. œ. #>œ Vln. I 5" p arco batt. arco batt. 3 7-12 ‰‰ U r ‰ & µ˘ µ p œ œ. œ. >œ 5" p arco batt. arco batt. 3 1-5 ‰‰ U r ‰ & n˘ n p œ œ. œ. >œ Vln. II 5" p arco batt. arco batt. 3 6-10 ‰‰ U r ‰ & ˘œ œ œ œ arco batt.p . . p 3 5" > ord. arco batt. r 1-4 `œ# B ® U #œ ‰ #˘œ œ. œ. Vla. arcop batt. 3 5" p> ord. arco batt. r 5-8 #œ ` ® U n ‰ B ˘ œ p nœ œ. œ. > arco batt. 3 5" p ord. arco batt. r 1-3 ? #œ U ‰ p#˘œ œ. œ. #œ arco batt. > Vc. 3 5" p ord. arco batt.

4-6 œ r ? ˘œ œ. œ. U nœ ‰ p > arco batt. p 3 5" ord. arco batt.

DB 1-6 r ? œ #˘ U ‰ œ œ. œ. #>œ p p Figure 32: mm. 27 to mm. 29 – strings only

The second approach employs different beat placements of impulses to affect synchronization. In general, it may be said that, due to the large number of performers within an orchestra, the performance of an impulse on a metrical beat would vary based on the dis- crepancies of counting by each performer. Therefore, I hypothesize that an impulse placed on the downbeat of a measure would have a greater synchronicity than if that same impulse were placed, say, on the last thirty-second note of a measure. This largely depends on how well an orchestra conductor articulates the metrical structure, but in general a downbeat often serves as a point of synchrony for the musicians. The use of this technique can also be seen in Figure 32. Here, the triplet impulse is placed on the last 16th beat of the measure while the single impulse attack is placed on the downbeat of the

111

measure. This effect ‘psychologically’ controls the synchronicity of individual impulses, thereby controlling the fusion of individual instruments into a complex orchestral timbre.

Timbre Isorhythm

The timbre typology sequence actually contains more units than the repeated harmonic-instrumental sequence. This produces a non-linear situation similar to the iso- rhythmic techniques of the medieval and renaissance period of composition. In such iso- rhythmic structures, a rhythmic sequence (talea) becomes mapped to a fixed pattern of pitches (color). In my case however, a fixed pattern of 13 timbre typologies (see Figure

30) is mapped onto a repeated sequence of 8 harmonic-instrument complexes (see Figure

28). As such, the shifts in harmonic content provide variation to the timbre typologies.

Timbre ‘Grammar’

With the use of a fixed timbre melody (Figure 25) in the horizontal organization of timbre, and a fixed sequence of timbre morphologies (Figure 30) for the vertical organization of timbre, I attempt to create a repeatable and recognizable timbre sequence. I hoped that the serial ordering of timbre produces a perceivable timbre ‘grammar’. Alt- hough it may be far-fetched to assert that such a timbre grammar could be perceived, repeatable sequences of timbre types did nonetheless form for me an important aspect of compositional organization. For example, the sequential organization of timbre morphologies (Figure 30) occurs within different temporal scales. The opening section of Ksana I

(mm. 1-35) employs a sequence of timbre morphologies on metrical impulses. In the pe- nultimate section (mm. 116-130), the same sequence of morphological structures becomes deployed as attack impulses found only in the strings.

112

6.4 Texture: Vertical-Horizontal Integrations (an example)

An impulse directly represents a moment. However, if one stretches the impulse, it eventually may become a line, blurring the distinction between the horizontal and vertical structuring. A stretched timbral impulse may be poetically considered as a textured timbral stream. The composition of texture can be regarded as an expansion of timbre, and conversely, timbre may be thought of as having textural qualities, suggesting a gray zone in between timbre and texture.

In Section 4 (mm. 82-96), I present a series of timbre / texture complexes that were conceived as if the typological impulses had been stretched over time. The qualities of the textures represent a sequence of timbral typologies whose longer durations engender a longer spectrotemporal profile. These typologies relate to the outer categories found in Schaeffer’s typology complex, which represent disproportional temporal units whose qualities signify more complex typologies (See Figure 33.)

Measures mm. 82-85 mm. 86-89 mm. 90-91 mm. 92-96

Instruments Strings Strings Strings String + Winds Schaeffer Typology Hn Zn Y Zx/Zn

Figure 33: Texture Typologies in Section 4 (mm. 82-96)

The first texture (mm. 82-85) denotes a basic pitched timbral stream (Hn) whose spectral envelope gives an uncertain temporal duration. The second texture (mm. 86-89) adds a trill to the first texture, suggesting an iterative-pitched typology of uncertain duration (Zn). The third texture (mm. 90-91) may be considered clearer in typology (Y) since it represents two streams with glissandi going in opposite directions. The final texture uses vertical bowing on the strings to produce pitched white-noise glissandi, coupled with

113

the low winds, whose players flutter-tongue a harmonic complex. This produces a composite timbre with both noise and pitched elements (Zx/Zn).

114

Chapter 7

TIMBRE: FUNCTIONAL APPLICATIONS

7.1 Introduction

The following excerpts from Ksana I illustrate the compositional control of spectral fusion in order to disperse the calculation of sensory dissonance among auditory sources. The control of spectral fusion occurs through the compositional manipulation of fusion parameters (Chapter 4). The challenge in generating spectral fusion for an orchestral situation arises from ascertaining the correct notational equivalencies to these fusion parameters. I assert that this can occur through the control of traditional symbolic articulation markings and through the groupings of instrumental families. The following illus- trations exhibit various attempts at producing fusion.

7.2 Attempts

7.2.1- Attempt I (mm. 81-94)

In this example, a pitch class set of (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) is distributed as a cluster among the players in the string section. This pitch cluster serves as a vehicle for changes in timbral structure. Moreover, the minor 2nd interval relationship between pitch components generates a high sensory dissonance profile that may be spread among five separate string groups or adhere to one fused group. Hearing one string timbre (full string ensemble) will connect the pitch cluster to a single source producing a higher degree of sensory dissonance than if the pitches were spread among the five string instrument sub-groups.

By using symbolic articulation indications to affect timbral changes, such as senza vibra- to, or molto sul ponticello, differing timbre qualities of each sub-group of string instru-

115

ments lead to a disintegration of a single spectral structure or string ensemble timbre.

This hopefully disperses the calculation of sensory dissonance among multiple sources.

Concurrently, sequential groupings arise from similarities in glissando direction and amplitude and frequency modulation congruencies.

Fusion parameters must connect to symbolic descriptions understood by orchestral musicians. In this attempt, the fusion qualities I control are the similarity of the spectral centroid (SC) and the temporal congruency of modulation (M). For the similarity of the spectral centroid, bow position controls the frequency distribution of a string timbre.

A molto sul ponticello (MSP) position gives a much ‘brighter’ timbre with very little fundamental frequency. A molto sul tasto (MST) indication produces a very ‘hollow’ sound with very little upper partials. An ordinario bow position yields a full spectrum string timbre. Controlling bow position among string instruments might aid in the separation of the overall string ensemble timbre into separate perceived sources. With regard to the overall concept of modulation, numerous symbolic controls exist. For example, tremolo indications equate with amplitude modulation. A molto vibrato sign produces frequency modulation. A trill indication equates with both amplitude, and a frequency modulation.

Finally a long glissando suggests a slow frequency modulation with a strong directional goal.

The functional process occurs over three sub-structures (see Figure 34). In measures 81 - 85, all five string sub-families perform different articulations and have differing bow positions, leading to a disintegration of a fused spectrum into five separate

components (SC0 M0), while dispersing the sensory dissonance profile. Gradually until the last beat of measure 85, the strings move towards a similar modulation indication and

116

bow position. After a unison attack on the last beat of measure 85, measures 86-89 present a situation with equivalent string parameters, since all strings exhibit an ordinario bow position, and they trill a minor second together. The similarity of spectral centroid,

of modulation, and of onset suggests a single fused spectrum (SC4 M4). From this, sensory dissonance might be calculated on all the pitch components belonging to a single fused spectrum rather than separated into individual string timbres, leading to a higher experience of tension.

Subsequently, between measures 90-93 two groups of strings begin a glissando in opposite directions. The upper group (Vln. I, II and Vla. 1-4) performs glissando upwards, whereas the rest of the string ensemble (Vla. 5-8, Vc. and Db.) moves downwards.

Due to this movement in opposite directions and to the fact that the two groups ultimately create a large frequency separation, the action suggests stream segregation and a disintegration of a single fused structure.

Instrument mm 81 - 85 mm. 86 - 89 mm. 90 - 93 Violin I Bow Position: sul tasto Bow Position: ordinary Bow Position: ordinary Modulation: molto vibrato Modulation: trill Modulation: gliss. up

Violin II Bow Position: sul ponticello Bow Position: ordinary Bow Position: ordinary Modulation: senza vibrato Modulation: trill Modulation: gliss. up

Viola Bow Position: ordinary Bow Position: ordinary Bow Position: ordinary Modulation: senza vibrato Modulation: trill Modulation: Vla. 1-4 gliss. up; Vla. 5-8 gliss. down

Violoncello Bow Position: sul ponticello Bow Position: ordinary Bow Position: ordinary Modulation: tremolo Modulation: trill Modulation: gliss. up

Double Bass Bow Position: ordinary Bow Position: ordinary Bow Position: ordinary Modulation: tremolo Modulation: trill Modulation: gliss. down

Fusion Array SC0 M0 SC4 M4 SC4 M3

Intended # of 5 1 2 Streams

Figure 34: Bow Position and Modulation for Each String Sub-Group (mm. 81-93)

117

One major problem with this first attempt arises from the experience that articulation differences in the strings may not be sufficiently effective enough to disintegrate the string orchestra timbre into separate perceivable sub-timbres. Rather we hear internal changes to a single timbre. Furthermore, some modulation patterns may actually disrupt the sensory dissonance profile. For example, pitch trills furnish more frequencies to the overall harmonic structure, creating a different sensory dissonance profile due to the increased number of pitches.

7.2.2 – Attempt II (mm. 101-116)

The fifth section of the composition, entitled Frequency Sweep, reveals how timbre function may be considered multidimensional. Here, the combination of the control of fusion within the string section, and an increasingly brighter frequency spectrum in the wind and brass sections, perhaps contributes to the building of tension. I was also concerned with avoiding harmonic specificity whereby the intervallic quality of a timbre combination becomes perceptually salient overtaking fusion or timbral concerns

(Pressnitzer et al. 2000). Therefore, a single pitch (F-sharp) is used in this section, reducing pitch variance thereby allowing for a timbre listening situation and facilitating fusion.

The initial process occurs through controlling the fusion of string instruments, and may be divided into four sub-sections (see Figure 35). Similar to the process outlined in the previous attempt above, I utilized symbolic indications of articulation to alter the timbral differences of the strings. Beginning at measures 101-103, all strings play without vibrato and have a sul tasto bow position. This suggests similar spectral centroid distributions and modulation congruency, engendering a single fused timbre. Subsequently in measures 104-106, the violins and the violas move to an ordinario bow position, with

118

molto vibrato indication, while the cellos and double bass play tremolo, giving an amplitude modulation. This suggests two separate timbral components, since modulation congruency between the two groups does not exist. The next sub-structure, measures 107-

108 serves as a transition to the next timbral state where all strings move towards an ordinario bow position with no vibrato. From measures 109-115, we have a single integrated timbre due to all strings commencing in unison and moving towards a sul ponticello bow position, while at the same time, performing an upwards glissando towards their highest note, creating a “common fate” directional gesture. Coincidentally, the addition of the rising glissando at the end connects to a pitch orientated tension device, since a rising pitch has traditionally been deployed to create excitement and anticipation.

Instrument mm. 101 - 103 mm. 104 - 106 mm. 107 - 108 mm. 109 - 115 Bow Position: Bow Position: Bow Position: Bow Position: sul tasto sul tasto - move to ordinary to ordinary Violins I & II Modulation: ordinary sul ponticello Modulation: senza vibrato Modulation: Modulation: molto vibrato senza vibrato glissando up

Bow Position: Bow Position: Bow Position: Bow Position: sul tasto - move to ordinary to sul tasto ordinary Viola ordinary sul ponticello Modulation: Modulation: Modulation: Modulation: senza vibrato molto vibrato senza vibrato glissando up

Bow Position: Bow Position: Bow Position: Bow Position: sul ponticello – ordinary to sul tasto sul ponticello Violoncello move to ordinary sul ponticello Modulation: Modulation: Modulation: Modulation: senza vibrato tremolo senza vibrato glissando up

Bow Position: Bow Position: Bow Position: Bow Position: sul tasto - move to ordinary to sul sul tasto sul tasto Double Bass ordinary ponticello Modulation: Modulation: Modulation: Modulation: senza vibrato tremolo senza vibrato glissando up

Fusion Array SC3 M3 SC1 M1 SC2 M3 SC3 M3

Intended # 1 2 3 1 of Streams Figure 35: Bow Position and Modulation for Each String Subgroup (mm. 101-115)

119

Concurrently in the winds and the brass sections of the orchestra, I apply a spectral morphology such that the frequency range moves from low to high. Since all the instruments play the single pitch of F-sharp, the frequency buildup of timbre represents the primary compositional device. The sweeping of a frequency spectrum from low to high also represents a common tension-building device for timbre in electronic music. In Figure 36, by organizing instrumental timbres according to their playing ranges and sequentially adding them from low to high, timbre brightness increases with each instrument added.

m. 101 m. 102 m. 103 m. 104 m. 105 m. 106 m. 107 m. 108 m. 109 m. 110 m. 111 m. 112 m. 113 m. 114 m. 115 m. 116 m. 117 m. 118 m. 119

Picc. Trpt. Flt. Ob. Clar. E. hrn.

Hrn. I Hrn. II B. Clar. Tbn. B. tbn. Bsn. C. Bsn. Tuba

Figure 36: Instrument Addition in Winds and Brass (mm. 101-119)

An issue that arose in this scenario was that, since this section employs only a single pitch F-sharp, the sensory dissonance profile would be lower, compared to the pitch cluster deployed in the previous example. Thus, the control of fusion of string instruments into separate sources will not influence sensory dissonance calculation to a large degree, since there are no intervallic relationships being distributed among sources.

Perhaps, however, the dispersion of a single source (mm. 101 - 103) to numerous sources

(mm. 104 – 108) and then sudden conversion back into a single source (m. 109) suggests at least a goal-directed motion that acts in conjunction with the other tension building processes. What might be considered successful in this scenario (Attempt II) is the role of other tension building devices in relationship to spectral fusion. The instrumentally artic-

120

ulated frequency sweep in the winds and brass sections, from low to high, provides a timbre tension device. As well, the glissando upwards in the strings provides a pitch orientated tension structure. As such, each separate process contributes to the musical sensation of increasing tension. Thus, I argue, musical tension can be considered multidimensional. The use of spectral fusion as a tension-building device may be used in conjunction with pitch, rhythmic, dynamic and goal-directed gestural tension structures in order to produce a rich musical discourse.

7.2.3 Attempt III (mm. 131-182)

During the compositional process, I began to question the notion of “goal- directed” tension. The deployment of the fusion model of timbre has thus far been applied to the sequential dissipation of sensory dissonance presenting a diachronic approach towards timbral tension. If, however, timbre may be considered absolute and not a relational structure, then perhaps an additional approach could include the creation of tension

‘situations’, or a static functionality. Here, timbral tension may be considered as arising from a ‘shimmering’ of various sensory dissonance calculations connected to non- directional orchestral fusions and disintegrations. This concept of fusion shimmering may also be seen as a reconsideration of Schoenberg’s Farben from the Fünf Orchesterstücke

(1909), in which the canonic displacement of shifting timbral structures creates a shimmering of timbral colors.

In the final section of the composition, I achieve fusion ‘shimmering’ through the canonic organization of horizontal timbre streams (see Figure 37). By using the rhythmic cell (see Chapter 5) at two different scale lengths, and then dispersing them canonically between each instrumental voice of the orchestra, one can achieve a staggered sequential

121

streaming based upon timbral qualities. As a result of this motion, vertical structures emerge from a horizontal ordering. Therefore, fusion results from synchronous moments where separate impulses within horizontal streams coincide based upon their canonic displacement. Furthermore, due to the displaced onsets of the orchestral groupings, we achieve different fusions of timbres, each with varying sensory dissonance profiles. As well, a canon also represents an accumulation and subsequent dissipation of texture, since the number of voices grows as the canon progresses and then subsequently fades as each voice finishes the horizontal pattern.

Winds (air only)

Brass (air only) Brass (air only) Xylophone + Woodblock Bass Drum Snare Xylophone Gong Vlns. and Db. (bow Vlns. (Vertical Bow) Vlns. (L.H. Pizz.) bridge) Vla. (G-G# drone) Vc. and Db. (arco Vc. and Db. (col legno Vc. (col legno battuto) ricochet) battuto)

Figure 37: Horizontal Organization of Timbre Streams (mm. 131-182)

In Attempt III, as well, the combination of single impulses within each stream engenders a larger vertical structure. The percussion section also performs short impulses but with a continuous pulse, articulating the beat, and with a slow shift in instrument, as discussed in Chapter 6. The following table presents the small impulsive elements utilized in this section, as shown in Figure 38:

Winds and Brass Air noise Xylophone (high) Gong (low) Percussion Snare (ricochet) Bass drum (on edge) Vertical-along-strings bowing Strings Left Hand pizzicato (high) Figure 38: Impulsive Elements (mm. 131-182)

122

To integrate contrapuntal textures to this situation, half of the violas perform a long continuous but frequency-fluctuating drone starting with a major 7th (G3 to F-sharp

4), and ending on an augmented octave (G3 to G-sharp 4). As the section progresses, the other strings add to the drone by bowing directly on the bridge, providing a fused noise element.

By creating displaced impulses of different timbres and utilizing a constant steady pulse as the rhythmic backbone, I create a situation whereby different fusions of instruments occur. The number of voices in this case becomes difficult to enumerate since the horizontal organization constantly shifts, accumulates, and dissipates timbres. Hopefully, this creates a ‘shimmering’ of fusions each with different sensory dissonance profiles leading to a tension ‘situation,’ or a static functionality, rather than goal-orientated tension and release structures.

7.2.4 Discussion

As outlined in Chapter 4, the application of the compositional model for the functional control of timbre presents many challenges when dealing with orchestral music.

The fusion and disintegration of spectral components must be suggested through the control of individual instruments or of orchestral groupings. Moreover, when dealing with such a large number of musicians, fine control of fusion parameters becomes extremely difficult, especially in comparison to electronic music practices where a precise control of timbre parameters may be achievable. For example, with the technique of impulse synchronicity, the onset of orchestral musicians will always be “cloud-like,” due to the dis- crepancies associated with counting time by each individual performer. Temporal modu-

123

lation congruencies provide further difficulty. For example, a large vibrato by fifty string players will not have modulation congruency because each performer will produce vibra- to at different rates and widths. Precise notation of vibrato would be required in order to achieve a temporal modulation congruency. Yet such a precise notational practice might go against ‘standard’ practices that orchestral performers often demand. More generally, timbre functionality may be masked or enhanced by the presence of other musical parameters such as rhythmic and pitch functionalities. Therefore, the manner with which these structures may be employed in conjunction with spectral fusion – in order to create an overall tension profile – requires further exploration.

7.3 Summary and Criticisms

This thesis has not only aimed to understand and survey the historical uses of timbre in musical composition, but also to suggest a model for the compositional control of spectral fusion as a parameter of the functional use of timbre. Functional structures of timbre can be approached from the point of view of expressive structures that are able to generate a sense of tension and release. The control of spectral fusion arises from the manipulation of fusion parameters, which derive from perceptual grouping factors as understood within Auditory Scene Analysis (Bregman 1990). Fusion parameters divide into two categories: frequency-based parameters and temporal-based parameters. Frequency controls include the harmonicity of the frequency components, the spatial proximity of frequency components, and the similarity of spectral centroid. Temporal fusion parameters include the synchronicity of onset of frequency components, the synchronicity of onset of modulation, and the temporal congruency of modulation. Differing levels of fusion

124

lead to a different number of perceived sources allowing composers to create different timbral structures with differing functional roles. Furthermore, these approaches entail the notion of sensory dissonance, a physiological aspect of dissonance that arises from frequency ‘beatings’ within the ear. Manipulating fusion parameters will lead the listener to consider spectral components as belonging to either one or more sources, thereby unit- ing or dispersing the sensory dissonance profile of a timbre structure within one source or among many, respectively. Most importantly, it matters what frequency components are being fused. A cluster of minor seconds contains a high degree of sensory dissonance and thus its separation into separate timbral components or fusion into a single component will have different perceptual consequences with regard to tension. However, the fusion or disintegration of a stack of octaves or perfect fifths might not have a significant effect on the sensation of tension, as its sensory dissonance is already quite low. Finally, the compositional control of spectral fusion may be considered an aspect of a multidimensional approach to timbre function that incorporates, gestural, and semiotic approaches.

Timbre function may also be exploited in conjunction with pitch, rhythm, and formal tension devices in order to construct a rich and expressive music.

Addressing the structuring force of timbre in order to control tension has prompt- ed in me more questions than solutions. The multi-functional deployment of timbre presents challenges when approaching it from a multi-dimensional musical context. More specifically, one needs to further explore timbre-orientated tension in relationship to other tensions generated by rhythmic, gestural, and harmonic effects. Perhaps, the concept of a counterpoint or of counterpoints of tension structures between various musical structures can be further developed. Likewise, more exploration is required with regard to which

125

fusion parameters, and in what contextual situations they may be considered more salient or relevant than other features for compositional purposes As well, when writing instrumental music, determining the correct notational equivalencies of the fusion parameters becomes vital, since the communication of fusion parameters to performers and listeners is important for its adoption into the technical language of a composer.

Finally, it is the case that some issues regarding the compositional manipulation of spectral fusion may not be controllable at all. For example, based on recent personal experience, a performance within a completely dry concert hall hinders the fusion of complex timbres, even with the use of synchronous attacks. The lack of any reverberation provides us with the opportunity to hear analytically each instrument separately from the whole. As well, listening schemas, or the manners with which one becomes conditioned to hear and appreciate music, vary extremely widely with each person. For some, the very act of watching an instrumental performance pushes them towards analytic listening situations since they actually see the sound sources in front of them. These two issues represent common factors that are uncontrollable by the composer, and repel the tendency towards spectral fusion. Conversely, harmony-based functionalities seem to work in a variety of robust situations. When dealing with timbre and spectral fusion, however, this might not always be the case.

7.4 Afterthought

Finally, the theoretical model suggested in my thesis does point towards a phenomenon of timbre-orientated tension not yet fully explored. Perhaps we are just at the beginning of the focused development of a timbre counterpoint. True, the connections

126

established between perception and musical system, such as tonality, may have always been present. The rules of tonal counterpoint perhaps also developed from the conscious avoidance of dissonant intervals that evoke sensory dissonance correlations. Bregman

(1990) has argued that sensory dissonance was avoided in polyphonic music of the 16th century only when the polyphonic streams were maximally segregated. Further, certain practices in tonal counterpoint make this perceptual organization more prevalent and val- ued:

In their origin, the role of many of the pattern principles encoun- tered in contrapuntal theory was to control the sensation of roughness associated with the dissonances and (...) it was only later, when these principles became embodied in musical styles, that they acquired a syntactic role. (Wright and Bregman 1987, 74)

Therefore, one may project that the distribution of sensory dissonance calculation arising from the fusion and separation of spectral components may be considered the primordial seed to the development of contrapuntal rules with regard to timbre. It is clear that we are still only at the beginning. The territory has hardly been mapped, and it has scarcely been explored.

127

Appendix I: Harmonic - Timbre Complexes

1 23 4 567 8 9

Orchidée Ouput Intuitive orchestration Picc. Picc. Picc. #œ Oboe Flute Bb Clar. Oboe Oboe #œ Oboe œ E.Hrn œ E.horn œ Flute Oboe œ Flute œ µ œ œ & µ#œœ µ Flute œ Bsn. Winds œ B. Clar. œ œ Flt Bsn œ B. Clar ? BClar. Bsn. œ Bsn. µ BClar. bœ Bsn. ##œ Bsn. œ B.Clar. µœ œ B.Clar. œ œ #œ B.Clar. œ

Trpt. #œ T.Trbn. & µµœ Trpt. Trpt. - harm. mute Brass œ œ T.Tbn. B.Tbn. T.Tbn œ ? œ Hrn. µ B.Tbn. Hrn., T.Tbn B.Tbn #œ œ T.Tbn. bœ Hrn. µ# œ B.Tbn. T.Tbn. #œ œ œ #œ T.Tbn. #œ Tuba # œ B.Tbn Tuba œ #œ #œ

harm. Vlns. œ Vlns. & œ Vns. Vla. Vns. Bartok µ Vns. µ œ Vla. Strings œ œ œ œ Vla. Vcs. ? Vcs. µœ Vcs. #œ µ Vla. #œ Cbs. œ µ œ Vcs. Vc. µ œ µœ Vcs. µœ Cbs. œ Vcs. Cbs. - Bartok œ Cbs. - Bartok œ Cbs. #œ µ œ #œ Cbs. c.l.b Cbs. #œ œ #œ # œ #œ œ œ œ œ & µ#œœ œ µ µµœ µœ Harmony œ nœ œ œ œ œœ œ µ œ µ µ # œ µ œ ? #œ µ œ #œ œ œ µ µ œ œ bœ µ œœ ###œœµœ œ œ µ œ b œœ #œ µ œ œ ##œ ##œœ #œ b œ #œ # œ œ œ

128

Bibliography

American National Standards Institute. 1973. Psychoacoustical Terminology. S3 20. New York: American National Standards Institute.

Berlioz, Hector. 1844. Grand Traité D’instrumentation et D’orchestration Modernes, Dédié À Sa Majesté Frédéric Guillaume IV Roi de Prusse. Paris: Schonenberger.

Berry, Wallace. 1976. Structural Functions in Music. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Bigand, E., R. Parncutt, and F. Lerdahl. 1996. “Perception of Musical Tension in Short Chord Sequences: The Influence of Harmonic Function, Sensory Dissonance, Horizontal Motion, and Musical Training.” Perception & Psychophysics 58: 125– 41.

Boulez, Pierre. 1987. “Timbre and Composition ‐ Timbre and Language.” Contemporary Music Review 2 (1): 161–71.

Bregman, Albert S. 1990. Auditory Scene Analysis: The Perceptual Organization of Sound. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Bregman, Albert S., and Steven Pinker. 1978. “Auditory Streaming and the Building of Timbre.” Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie 32 (1): 19 - 31.

Cadoz, Claude. 1991. “Timbre et Causalité.” In Le Timbre: Métaphore Pour La Compo- sition edited by Jean-Baptiste Barrière, 77–46. Paris: IRCAM/Christian Bourgois.

Carpentier, Grégoire, and Jean Bresson. 2010. “Interacting with Symbol, Sound, and Fea- ture Spaces in Orchidée, a Computer-Aided Orchestration Environment.” Com- puter Music Journal 34 (1): 10–27.

Cazden, Norman. 1980. “The Definition of Consonance and Dissonance.” International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music 11 (2): 123 - 168.

Chowning, John M. 1977. “The Synthesis of Complex Audio Spectra by Means of Fre- quency Modulation.” Computer Music Journal 1 (2): 146–54.

Delalande et al. 1996. Les Unités sémiotiques temporelles: éléments nouveaux d’analyse musicale. Laboratoire musique et informatique de Marseille.

Di Scipio, Agostino. 1994. “Micro-Time Sonic Design and Timbre Formation.” Contem- porary Music Review 10 (2): 135–48.

Dolan, Emily I. 2013. The Orchestral Revolution: Haydn and the Technologies of Tim- bre. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

129

Erickson, Robert. 1975. Sound Structure in Music. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Fales, Cornelia. 2002. “The Paradox of Timbre.” Ethnomusicology 46 (1): 56 - 95.

———. 2005. “Listening to Timbre during the French Enlightenment,” Paper presented at the annual meeting for the Conference on Interdisciplinary Musicology (CIM05), March 10-12.

Godøy, Rolf Inge. 2006. “Gestural-Sonorous Objects: Embodied Extensions of Schaeffer’s Conceptual Apparatus.” Organised Sound 11 (02): 149 - 157.

Grey, John M. 1975. An Exploration of Musical Timbre. Stanford University: Center for Computer Research in Music and Acoustics.

———. 1977. “Multidimensional Perceptual Scaling of Musical Timbres.” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 61 (5): 1270–77.

Grisey, Gérard. 1987. “Tempus Ex Machina: A Composer’s Reflections on Musical Time.” Contemporary Music Review 2 (1): 239–75.

Grisey, Gérard, and Joshua Fineberg. 2000. “Did You Say Spectral?” Contemporary Mu- sic Review 19 (3): 1–3.

Handel, Stephen. 1993. Listening: An Introduction to the Perception of Auditory Events. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Handel, Stephen, and Molly L. Erickson. 2001. “A Rule of Thumb: The Bandwidth for Timbre Invariance Is One Octave.” Music Perception 19 (1): 121–2.

Helmholtz, Hermann von. 2009. On the Sensations of Tone as a Physiological Basis for the Theory of Music. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Huron, David Brian. 2006. Sweet Anticipation: Music and the Psychology of Expectation. Cambridge: MIT press.

Kendall, Gary S., and Mauricio Ardila. 2008. “The Artistic Play of Spatial Organization: Spatial Attributes, Scene Analysis and Auditory Spatial Schemata.” In Computer Music Modeling and Retrieval. Sense of Sounds, edited by Richard Kronland- Martinet, Sølvi Ystad, Kristoffer Jensen, 125–38. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

Krumhansl, Carol L., and Paul Iverson. 1992. “Perceptual Interactions between Musical Pitch and Timbre.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 18 (3): 739 - 51.

130

Lachenmann, Helmut. 1966. “Klangtypen Der Neuen Musik.” Zeitschrift Für Musiktheo- rie, 1: 21–30.

Lembke, Sven-Amin, and Stephen McAdams. 2012. “Timbre Blending of Wind Instru- ments: Acoustics and Perception.” In Proc. 5th International Conference of Stu- dents of Systematic Musicology/SysMus12, Montreal, Canada, 1–5.

Lerdahl, Fred. 1987. “Timbral Hierarchies.” Contemporary Music Review 2 (1): 135–60.

MacCallum, John, Jeremy Hunt, and Aaron Einbond. 2005. “Timbre as a Psychoacoustic Parameter for Harmonic Analysis and Composition.” In Proceedings of the 2005 International Computer Music Conference.

Manoury, Philippe. 1991. “Les Limites de La Notion de ‘Timbre.’” in Le Timbre: Méta- phore Pour La Composition edited by Jean-Baptiste Barrière, 293-99. Paris: IRCAM/Christian Bourgois.

Maresz, Yan. 2013. “On Computer-Assisted Orchestration.” Contemporary Music Re- view 32 (1): 99–109.

Marozeau, Jeremy, and Alain de Cheveigné. 2007. “The Effect of Fundamental Frequen- cy on the Brightness Dimension of Timbre.” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 121 (1): 383–87.

Marozeau, Jeremy, Alain de Cheveigné, Stephen McAdams, and Suzanne Winsberg. 2003. “The Dependence of Timbre on Fundamental Frequency.” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 114 (5): 2946-57.

McAdams, Stephen. 1982. “Spectral Fusion and the Creation of Auditory Images.” In Music, Mind, and Brain edited by Manfred Clynes, 279–98. New York: Springer.

McAdams, Stephen. 1999. “Perspectives on the Contribution of Timbre to Musical Struc- ture.” Computer Music Journal 23 (3): 85–102.

McAdams, Stephen. 2013. “Musical Timbre Perception.” In The Psychology of Music, 3rd ed. edited by Diana Deutsch, 35 - 62. San Diego: Elsevier.

McAdams, Stephen, and Jean-Christophe Cunible. 1992. “Perception of Timbral Analo- gies.” Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences 336 (1278): 383–89.

McAdams, Stephen, and Stella Paraskeva. 1997. “Influence of Timbre, Presence/absence of Tonal Hierarchy and Musical Training on the Perception of Musical Tension and Relaxation Schemas.” In Proceedings: International Computer Music Con- ference 1997, 438–41.

131

McAdams, Stephen, and Kaija Saariaho. 1985. “Qualities and Functions of Musical Tim- bre.” In Proceedings of the 1985 International Computer Music Conference, Van- couver, Canada, August 1985, 367-74.

Murail, Tristan. 2000. “After-Thoughts.” Contemporary Music Review 19 (3): 5–9.

Nattiez, Jean-Jacques. 1990. Music and Discourse: Toward a Semiology of Music. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Nouno, Gilbert, Arshia Cont, Grégoire Carpentier, and Jonathan Harvey. 2009. “Making an Orchestra Speak.” Paper presented at the Sound and Music Computing Confer- ence, Porto, Portugal, December 2008.

Parncutt, Richard, and Hans Strasburger. 1994. “Applying Psychoacoustics in Composi- tion: ‘Harmonic’ Progressions of ‘Nonharmonic’ Sonorities.” Perspectives of New Music 32 (2): 88 - 129.

Perle, George. 1989. The Operas of Alban Berg: Lulu. Vol. 2. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Plomp, Reinier. 1970. “Timbre as a Multidimensional Attribute of Complex Tones.” Fre- quency Analysis and Periodicity Detection in Hearing, 397–414, Leiden: Sijthoff.

Pressnitzer, Daniel, Stephen McAdams, Suzanne Winsberg, and Joshua Fineberg. 2000. “Perception of Musical Tension for Nontonal Orchestral Timbres and Its Relation to Psychoacoustic Roughness.” Perception & Psychophysics 62 (1): 66–80.

Risset, Jean-Claude. 1991. “Timbre et Synthèse Des Sons.” Le Timbre, Métaphore Pour La Composition edited by Jean-Baptiste Barrière, 239-60. Paris: IRCAM/Christian Bourgois.

Risset, Jean-Claude, and David L. Wessel. 1999. “Exploration of Timbre by Analysis and Synthesis.” in The Psychology of Music, 2nd ed. edited by Diana Deutsch, 113 - 158. San Diego: Academic Press.

Roads, Curtis. 1979. “A Tutorial on Non-Linear Distortion or Waveshaping Synthesis.” Computer Music Journal, 3 (2): 29–34.

Roads, Curtis, and Paul Wieneke. 1979. “Grammars as Representations for Music.” Computer Music Journal 3 (1): 48-55.

Rosch, Eleanor. 1999. “Principles of Categorization.” In Concepts: Core Readings, edited by Eric Margolis and Stephen Laurence, 189–206. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. 1768. Dictionnaire de Musique. Paris: Duchesne la Venue.

132

Roy, Stéphane. 2004. L’analyse des musiques électroacoustiques, modéles et proposi- tions. Paris: Editions L’Harmattan.

Saariaho, Kaija. 1987. “Timbre and Harmony: Interpolations of Timbral Structures.” Contemporary Music Review 2 (1): 93–133.

Sandell, Gregory J. 1995. “Roles for Spectral Centroid and Other Factors in Determining ‘Blended’ Instrument Pairings in Orchestration.” Music Perception 13 (2): 209– 46.

Schaeffer, Pierre. 1966. Traité Des Objets Musicaux: Essai Interdisciplines. 2nd ed. Par- is: Éditions du Seuil.

Schaeffer, Pierre, François Bernard Mâche, Michel Philippot, François Bayle, Luc Ferra- ri, Ivo Malec, and Bernard Parmegiani. 1967. La Musique Concrète. Paris: Press- es universitaires de France.

Schoenberg, Arnold. 1922. Harmonielehre. 3rd ed. 3370. Vienna: Universal Edition.

Sethares, William. A. 2005. Tuning, Timbre, Spectrum, Scale Vol. 2. London: Springer.

Shields, Robin and Roger Kendall. 2004. “The Relation of Timbre to Dissonance and Spectral Fusion.” In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Music Perception & Cognition, Evanston: 596-9.

Smalley, Denis. 1994. “Defining Timbre — Refining Timbre.” Contemporary Music Re- view 10 (2): 35–48.

———. 1997. “Spectromorphology: Explaining Sound-Shapes.” Organised Sound 2 (02): 107–26.

Stockhausen, Karlheinz. 1963a. "Momentform: Neue Beziehungen zwischen Auffüh- rungsdauer, Werkdauer und Moment". In Texte zur Musik, vol. 1, pp. 189-210. Cologne: DuMont Schauberg.

Stumpf, Carl. 1890. Tonpsychologie. Vol. 2. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.

Tan, Anthony. 2014. “Timbre as Vertical Process: Attempting a Perceptually Informed Functionality of Timbre,” Paper presented at the Electroacoustic Music Studies Network Conference (EMS14), Berlin, Germany, June 2014.

Taruskin, Richard. 2009. Music in the Early Twentieth Century: The Oxford History of Western Music. New York: Oxford University Press.

Terhardt, Ernst. 1974. “On the Perception of Periodic Sound Fluctuations (roughness).” Acta Acustica United with Acustica 30 (4): 201–13.

133

Thoresen, Lasse, and Andreas Hedman. 2007. “Spectromorphological Analysis of Sound Objects: An Adaptation of Pierre Schaeffer’s Typomorphology.” Organised Sound 12 (2): 129–41.

Varese, Edgard, and Chou Wen-chung. 1966. “The Liberation of Sound.” Perspectives of New Music 5 (1): 11 - 19.

Wessel, David L. 1979. “Timbre Space as a Musical Control Structure.” Computer Music Journal 3 (2): 45 - 52.

Wright, James K., and Albert S. Bregman. 1987. “Auditory Stream Segregation and the Control of Dissonance in Polyphonic Music.” Contemporary Music Review 2 (1): 63–92.

134

VOLUME II:

Full Score

Ksana I

for Orchestra

2014

Anthony Tan

Ksana I 2014 for Orchestra

Duration: ca. 14 minutes

The Score is in C

The piccolo sounds one octave higher. The Contra-bass sounds one octave lower.

Instrumentation

1 Piccolo 2 Flutes 2 Oboes 1 English horn 2 Bb Clarinets 1 Bass Clarinet 2 Bassoons 1 Contrabassoon

4 French Horns 2 Trumpets 1 Tenor Trombone 1 Bass Trombone 1 Tuba

2 Percussion Percussion 1 Tam-Tam Vibraphone Xylophone Bass Drum Suspended Cymbal Percussion 2 Claves Low Gong Snare Wood Block Temple Blocks

Harp

10 Violin I 10 Violin II 8 Viola 8 Violoncello 4 Contra-Bass

Performance Instructions

Conductor

This work is about time and about the experience of individual moments in music. I attempted to work with categories of metrical, chronological, and morphological temporal families. This relates, respectively, to the meter, the seconds, and the instrumental timbre of the score. Musically, this work also deals with the contrast of impulse and line. If one temporally stretches an impulse, at what point does one perceive a line? Conversely, if one compresses a line, at what point does one perceive an impulse? From the point of view of orchestration, I approached the orchestra as a sound design tool. (more specifically, as an additive synthesis technique borrowed from Electroacoustic music). Here, individual instruments are combined together to create composite sounds – or a “Zusammenklang”. Therefore, from the perspective of an individual performer, the individual instrumental sound might not make much sense. When all instruments play together, however, the overall sound is more interesting. I focused on how I could combine small, very simple sounds, in order to create more complex sonorities Dynamic markings reflect the desired perceived dynamic and not the exerted energy of the performer.

General

- ¼ tone flat - ¼ tone sharp

¾ tone sharp

Winds (general)

“halb luft/ half ton” bis “nur luft” Nur luftgerausch – Flutes and Clarinets

The sound should transition from “half air / half - A square note head with only one staff line tone” to a sound that is all air. denotes that the instrument should be blown such that only air noise is produced. Choose a finger position that creates the strongest air sound. – No distinct pitch should be heard. Mundstuck abnehmen – Oboes and Bassoons

Flute

Whistle Tone - Remove mouthpiece and blow through instrument producing only air noise. Choose finger position that produces the best air sound. No distinct pitch should be heard.

- Produce high, unstable, and wavering whistle-tones.

Brass

Nur luftgeräusch Slap Tongue

- A square note head with only one staff line denotes that the instrument should be blown such that only air noise is produced. Choose a finger position that creates the strongest air sound. - This sound is produced by simultaneously exhaling – No distinct pitch should be heard. into the instrument, and then stopping the air with the tongue. This action produces a percussive effect with a small amount of pitch.

Harp

- Strike the lower strings of the harp with the palm of hand.

Strings

Battuto Bow Pressure

- light bow pressure

- Extreme Bow pressure - col legno battuto – strike the string with legno portion of bow

Bridge Clef and Vertical Bowing

- arco battuto – strike the string with arco portion of bow - Bridge Clef – This clef shows the range of the fingerboard (bottom) up to the bridge (top). Generally, this represents vertical bowing whereby the bow is dragged up and down, vertically, on the Highest note possible fingerboard up to the bridge.

- Play the Highest note possible on the indicated - In this situation, dampen the string. second and third strings with left hand and bow vertically from about

the middle of the fingerboard towards the bridge with light bow

pressure. This movement should be done within the indicated duration. Bartok / Snap Pizzicato

- In this situation, dampen the second and third strings with left hand and bow vertically from about the middle of the Transition arrows fingerboard towards the bridge and then back towards the fingerboard with strong bow pressure.

- Transition arrows indicate a smooth transition of bow position. In this case, move from sul pont. to ord. to sul tasto bow positions.

Am Steg - The difference in this situation is that there is a gradual transition from light bow pressure to strong bow pressure when vertically bowing towards the bridge and then strong bow pressure to light bow pressure when going back towards the fingerboard. - Bow directly on the bridge to produce a white- noise sound.

Program Notes

English Deutsch

Ksana is a Buddhist concept of time and translates from the Sanskrit Ksana ist ein buddhistisches Konzept von Zeit. Übersetzt aus dem word for moment. As a temporal category, this moment represents Sanskrit bedeutet es ‘Augenblick’. Als Zeitkategorie ist der neither chronological nor progressive temporalities. Rather, this Augenblick weder chronologisch oder progressiv zu verstehen. moment can be defined as an instantaneous and also fleeting point in Vielmehr kann dieser Augenblick als sofortiger oder auch flüchtiger time. Within one moment, events may arise and disappear. Our Zeitpunkt definiert werden. Ereignisse entstehen und verschwinden in experience may be considered a series of instantaneous moments, einem Augenblick. Man kann Erfahrung als eine Serie von connected only by our own consciousness. Musically, I asked myself - Augenblicken betrachten, die durch unser eigenes Bewusstsein how long is a musical experience? I focused on the idea of a sonic verbunden sind. In musikalischer Hinsicht frage ich mich – wie lang ist impulse representing a single musical moment. I then tried to stretch eine musikalische Erfahrung? Wie ich mit dem Stück zeigen möchte, these impulses, forming a musical line. I approached the orchestra as a kann ein Schallimpuls eine musikalische Erfahrung darstellen. Ich habe complex sound-producing organism that could create a massive sound versucht diesen Schallimpuls zu strecken, so dass er eine musikalische from the collection of many small sounds. Therefore, within a single Linie bildet. Ich betrachte das Orchester als einen komplexen, impulse, all instruments sound, yet what we hear is this collective klangproduzierenden Organismus, der einen massiven Klang aus der ‘Zusammenklang’ and not the individual instruments. From this Ansammlung von vielen kleinen Klängen darstellt. So klingen in einem impulse, certain timbres emerge that were once hidden inside, revealing einzigen Impuls alle Instrumente, aber wir hören diesen kollektiven the sound contained within. Zusammenklang und nicht jedes individuelle Instrument. Aus diesem Impuls entstehen bestimmte Klangfarben, die im Inneren des Impulses verborgen waren und den in ihm enthaltenen Klang offenbaren.

Ksana I 6 Anthony Tan 7" 10" halb luft / 5" nur luft mit ton e = 40 halb ton Piccolo 3 #œ œ. œ. ∑ ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r j ‰ ≈ U U∑ & 8 ï ï R f π ∏ 7" f 10" halb luft / Tongue Ram 5" nur luft mit ton halb ton à 2 Flute 1-2 3 #œœ Uœœ. œœ ∑ ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r j ‰ ≈ ≈ r U∑ & 8 ï ï R N˘œ 10" f π ∏ 7" f 5"

Oboe 1-2 3 & 8 ∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ U∑ 10" 7" 5" 3 English Horn ∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r U r ≈ U∑ & 8 œ œ. œ œ p 10" halb luft / nur luft 7" ∏ 5" halb ton mit ton 3 r j Clarinet in Bb 1-2 r & ∑ ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ b ‰ ‰ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ U∑ 8 ï ï f œ f 7" fl 10" halb luft / π 5" Slap Tongue halb ton nur luft mit ton 3 r Bass Clarinet ? ∑ ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ bï ï ‰ ≈ r U ≈ U∑ 8 #œ œ. œ #œ R J P 7" fl 10" f π ∏ f 5" r Bassoon 1-2 3 r ? ∑ ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ ‰ ‰ ≈ r U ≈ U∑ 8 > #œ π Nœ œ. œ p fl 10" p 7" ∏ 5" r Contrabassoon 3 r ? ∑ ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ ‰ ‰ ≈ r U ≈ U∑ 8 > # #œ π œ œ. œ p fl p 7" ∏ 10" 5" con sord. à 2 3 nœ Uœ. œ ˘œ 1-2 ? ∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ n œ œ. œ ≈ U∑ 8 R R 7" Horn in F 10" π ∏ p 5" con sord. 3 U à 2 r 3-4 ? ∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ##œ œ. œ ≈ #œ U∑ 8 . fl R p 10" π 7" ∏ 5"

Trumpet in B 1-2 3 b & 8 ∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ U∑ 5" 10" 7" con sord. 3 r j r Trombone ? 8 ∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ Nœ œ œ ≈ U‰ Í π 5" 10" 7" con sord. 3 r j r Bass Trombone ? 8 ∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ œ œ ≈ U‰ Í π 10" 7" 3 5" Tuba ? 8 ∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ U∑

10" 7" Tam Tam L.V. 5" 3 with sticks > Percussion I > > ÷ 8 ∑ " " ≈ ‰ ‰ ‡ ≈ ‰ U‰ >‡ ‡ ≈ ‰ ≈ ‡ ∑ U∑ >‡ ≈ ‰ ≈ >‡ U∑ R R R R ∏ 10" P 7" p 3" Claves Percussion II 3 ÷ 8 ∑ >‡ ≈ ‰ ‰ >ËËË≈ ‰ U‰ Ë> ≈ ‰ ≈ Ë> ∑ U∑ Ë> ≈ ‰ ≈ Ë> U∑ F R 3 R R p R R 10" 7" 3" √ L.V. √ F 3 >œ >œ F >œ F >œ >œ F >œ F & ∑ R ≈ ‰ ‰ R ≈ ‰ U‰ R ≈ ‰ ≈ R ∑ U∑ R ≈ ‰ ≈ R U∑ 8 10" 7" 3" Harp 3 Db C B / E F Gb Ab P p ? 8 ∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ U∑

10" 7" Bridge Clef - F(II) arco leggiero (II) 5" Vertical Bowing (III) (III)F c.l. batt. arco 1-6 3 ï r ï r r ∑ ∑ U ® ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ ≈ r U∑ r ≈ ‰ ≈ U≈ & 8 ï. R ï ï & µ µ #œ œ œ Ô P >œ >œ ƒ Violin I π 10" π Ø Bridge Clef - ƒ 7" 5" F(II) arco leggiero Vertical Bowing (III) π c.l. batt. arco 7-12 3 ï r r ∑ ∑ U ® ≈ ‰ ≈ œh œh ‰ ≈ r U∑ r ≈ ‰ ≈ U≈ & 8 ï. R & µ n nœ œ œ π Ô R J P >œ >œ Ø ƒ tonlos 10" π 5" (II) π ƒ 7" tonlos am steg (III) ∏ ∏ ∏ F c.l. batt. arco am steg ∏ ∏ 1-5 3 . . r ï U. ∑ U ® ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ ≈ r U∑ r ≈ ‰ ≈ & 8 ÔR ï ï & µ R ∏ N>œ >œ Violin II 10" P P 5" tonlos 7" π ƒ π tonlos am steg arco 3 ∏ ∏ ∏ r j c.l. batt. am steg ∏ ∏ 6-10 . U. r r U. ∑ R ® ≈ ‰ ≈ œ œ ‰ ≈ U∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ R & 8 Ô N>œ n>œ ∏ 10" f P π P 7" π senza vib. (III) (II) 5" sul tasto (IV) rK (III) F c.l. batt. arco batt. 1-4 3 r ï r r r ∑ nœ. Uœ. œ ® ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ B ≈ U∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ U∑ B 8 ï ï n>œ n>œ œ #œ. 10"œ. œ π P Viola π P (III) ƒ 7" 5" senza vib. π arco batt. sul tasto (IV) K ord. c.l. batt. U r r 5-8 3 µ r r B ∑ œ. œ. œ ® ≈ ‰ ≈ œ œ ‰ ≈ n U∑ n ≈ ‰ ≈ œ U∑ 8 #œ. œ. œ >œ >œ P π 10" R J P π > senza vib. f π 7" 5" sul tasto pizz. c.l. batt. arco batt. 3 K µ r r 1-3 ? ∑ U r ® ≈ ‰ ≈ r Œ ≈ >œ U∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ U∑ n nœ œ 8 πœ. œ. œ œ P R π > Violoncello 10" f P senza vib. 7" 5" sul tasto pizz. c.l. batt. arco batt. 3 K µ 4-6 ? ∑ U r ® ≈ ‰ ≈ r Œ ≈ >œ U∑ r ≈ ‰ ≈ r U∑ 8 #œ. œ. œ nœ R nœ œ π 10" f P π P > senza vib. 7" 5" sul tasto c.l. batt. arco batt. rK pizz. Double Bass 1-6 3 U r > r r ? ∑ #œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ ≈ Œ ≈ nœ U∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ U∑ 8 . . œ n>œ œ π f P R π P >

7" 10" 7" 7" & halb luft / nur luft #œ flz. halb ton Picc. U∑ U∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ ‰ R ≈ ≈ r j ‰ ‰ U∑ ∑ & ï@ ï@ ƒ ƒ π 7" 7" 10" 7" Tongue Ram halb luft / nur luft flz. halb ton mit ton & &r Fl. 1-2 r #œ r j r U∑ U∑ ∑ U∑ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ œ ≈ ≈ ‰ ‰ U ≈ ‰ ≈ # & œ ï@ ï@ bœ. gliss. mit lippen œ œ ç > R ƒ f π 7" 10" 7" P π 7" p œ& Ob. 1-2 & & & U∑ U∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ ‰ œ ≈ ≈ #œ ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ R R πR 7" 10" 7" P π 7" &r & E. Hn. & r U∑ U∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ ‰ œ ≈ ≈ r ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ & nœ nœ P π 7" 10" 7" 7" π

B Cl. 1-2 n& b U∑ U∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ ∑ U∑ ∑ & R

7" 10" mit ton 7" P 7" Slap Tongue & r & r œ& B. Cl. ? U∑ U∑ ≈ nœ ‰ ‰ U∑ ‰ r ≈ ‰ ‰ bœ ≈ ≈ ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ﬂ > œ R f œ R π 7" π 7" 10" 7" ç P

Bsn. 1-2 & œ œ. œ. œ œ œ ? U∑ U∑ ≈ r ‰ ‰ U∑ ∑ B ‰ nœ ≈ ≈ U & nœ R f fl R 7" 10" 7" P p 7" π & & C. Bn. ? U∑ U∑ ≈ r ‰ ‰ U∑ ∑ ‰ r ≈ ‰ ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r #œ #œ œ f fl P π 10" 7" 7" & 7" ˘ # & & 1-2 œ œ r ? U∑ U∑ ≈ #œ ‰ ‰ U∑ ∑ ‰ R ≈ ≈ ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ p R œ F R π π Hrn. 7" 10" 7" & & 7" r & 3-4 r r r ? U∑ U∑ ≈ #œ ‰ ‰ U∑ ∑ ‰ nœ ≈ ≈ #œ ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ F fl p π œ 10" 7" π 7" 7" con sord.

B Tpt. 1-2 & #œ& b U∑ U∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ ‰ r ≈ ‰ ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ & R p œ π 7" 10" 7" slap tongue - "ft" 7" r bœ& nœ Tbn. ˘ & œ& ? U∑ U∑ ≈ #œ ‰ ‰ U∑ ‰ nœ ≈ ‰ ‰ R ≈ ≈ R ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ fl R p R 10" F 7" π π 7" slapF tongue - "ft" 7" & & B. Tbn. ? U∑ U∑ ≈ r ‰ ‰ U∑ ‰ #˘œ ≈ ‰ ‰ r ≈ ≈ r ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ& #œ R F fl R nœ π #œ π 7" 10" 7" F 7" slap tongue - "ft" p Tuba r & ? U∑ U∑ ≈ ‰ ‰ U∑ ‰ r ≈ ‰ ‰ r ≈ ≈ &r ∑ U∑ ∑ nœ #œ #œ F fl fl p π #œ 7" Hold Tam Tam 7" F 7" 10" in hand while hitting Vibraphone stopped > Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Perc. I > > + ÷ ‡ ‡ ≈ ‰ ‰ ‡‡‡≈ ‰ ‰ ‡ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ & Œ soft mallets ≈ r U U U U (b œ ) R Ped. 3 7" œ œ. œ. œ œ œ 7" 10" Ï π P π ∏ 7" f > Low Gong Perc. II Ë Ë ≈ ‰ ‰ >ËËË≈ ‰ ‰ ‡ ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ Œ ≈ œ ÷ U U U∑ ∑ metal mallets > ∑ > U > R R R 3 Ï 7" (√) 7" 10" L.V. p P 7" π >œ F >œ F n>Ú R ≈ ‰ U‰ R ≈ ‰ U‰ ≈ bœ ‰ ‰ U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ & 7" Hp. 7" 10" R 7" Ï ? U∑ U∑ ∑ U∑ ∑ ‰ r ≈ ‰ ∑ ≈ ‰ U‰ ∑ hit the lower strings r with left hand ß Ï b œ . p >œ 7" 10" 7" (II) arco leggiero (II) arco leggiero arco leggiero F (III) (III) pizz. arco F arco batt. 1-6 ï œ r ï. rK #>œ ∑ U ® ≈ ‰ ‰ U∑ ‰ r ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ U ® ≈ ‰ ≈ & ï. R # ï ï ï. ï R π Ô œ> p Vln. I P (II) 10" 7" F Ï f 7" Ø F arco leggiero (II) arco leggiero arco leggiero (III) pizz. arco (III) F K arco batt. 7-12 ï r œ r ï. r r & ∑ ï. U ® ≈ ‰ ‰ U∑ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ≈ ï ï. U ï ® ≈ ‰ ≈ π ÔR nœ P>œ 7" 10" > Ï p Ø 7" F (II) f 7" (III) arco batt. ∏ ∏ ∏ pizz. arco F 1-5 U. U. œ ˘ ‰ ‰ U∑ ‰ r ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ∑ U∑ r ≈ ‰ ≈ r & nœ nœ ï #œ µ œ 7" 10" > > > Vln. II 7" F Ï 7" P (II) arco batt. f pizz. arco ∏ ∏ ∏ (III)F 6-10 U. U. œ ‰ ‰ U∑ ‰ r ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ∑ U∑ r ≈ ‰ ≈ r & b˘œ b ï µ œ> #>œ >œ 7" 10" (II) 7" F Ï 7" P arco batt. arco batt. f (III) arco pizz. arco batt. arco batt. r r F > > 1-4 r ï r r r µ B œ ≈ ‰ U‰ œ ≈ ‰ U‰ ≈ ‰ B U∑ ‰ # ≈ ‰ ‰ nœ ≈ ≈ ∑ U∑ #œ ≈ ‰ ≈ œ > > ï ï œ> œ p π F f p R R Vla. 7" 10" (II) ƒ 7" 7" arco batt. arco batt. (III) π P pizz. arco batt. arco batt. r r Farco > > 5-8 r ï r r r µ B œ ≈ ‰ U‰ œ ≈ ‰ U‰ ≈ ‰ B U∑ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ∑ U∑ #œ ≈ ‰ ≈ œ > > ï ï nœ #œ œ F > f p R R p 7" π 10" (II) ƒ 7" 7" P arco batt. arco batt. π arco batt. (III) Farco pizz. arco batt. r r r r r r r 1-3 ? µ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ‰ ? ∑ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ nœ ∑ ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ >œ U #>œ U ï ï U #œ nœ U µœ µœ p > f R > Vc. F p P> arco batt. 7" arco batt. 10" (II) ƒ 7" 7" (III) π arco batt. Farco pizz. arco batt. 4-6 r r r ï ? r r r r ? µ ≈ ‰ U‰ ≈ ‰ U‰ ≈ ‰ U∑ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ œ ∑ U∑ µ ≈ ‰ ≈ µ œ #œ ï ï nœ> #œ œ >œ p> > F f p R P 10" 7" 7" > arco batt. 7" arco batt. ƒ arco batt. pizz. π pizz. arco batt. r DB 1-6 ? r ≈ ‰ U‰ r ≈ ‰ U‰ ≈ r ‰ ‰ U∑ ‰ r ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ r ∑ U∑ r ≈ ‰ ≈ r #œ #œ #œ #œ #œ #œ µœ µœ > > fl > f p > > p F P 18 21 B 26 3

4" flz. 8" 5" mit ton #œ œ œ @ Picc. @ & U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ R æJ ÔR ≈. ‰ U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ ƒ 4" π 8" 5" flz. flz. overblow œœ œœ œœ h Fl. 1-2 U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ @ @ ≈. ‰ U∑ ‰ h ∑ U∑ & R æJ ÔR œæ œæ. œæ œ œ 4" ƒ @ π 8" Í 5" Ï Ob. 1-2 & U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ R J ÔR 4" 8" 5" π ƒ E. Hn. & U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ R J ÔR 4" 8" 5" flz. π ƒ

Bb Cl. 1-2 nœ œ œ & U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ @ ! ® ≈ ‰ U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ R æJ ÔR 4" ƒ 8" 5" flz. π nur luft B. Cl. - - - ? ? U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ bœ œ œ ≈. ‰ U∑ ÷ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ∑ U∑ @R æJ !R F R R R 4" Ô mundstück abnehmen π 8" und in das Instrument blasen Mundstück 5" ƒ f zurückstellen nur luft Bsn. 1-2 ? - - - ? B U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ ≈. ‰ U∑ ÷ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ∑ ∑ R J R F U 4" Ô R f R R π ƒ 8" 5" C. Bn. ? U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r j rK ® ≈ ‰ U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ œ œ œ π ƒ 4" 8" 5" flz. nur Luftgeräusch 1-2 - - > > ? U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ ≈. ‰ U∑ ÷ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ≈ ï ï ï ≈ ‰ U‰ & @R æJ R R R R R Hrn. Ô f 5" 4" π ƒ 8" flz. nur Luftgeräusch F f - - 3-4 ? U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ bœ œ œ ≈. ‰ U∑ ÷ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï >ï ï ≈ ‰ ≈ ï ï >ï ≈ ‰ U‰ ? @R æJ ÔR R R R R 4" 8" f 5" flz. π ƒ F f B Tpt. 1-2 b & U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ @R æJ ÔR 4" 8" 5" flz. π ƒ nur Luftgeräusch &r > Tbn. ? U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ U∑ ‰ #&œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ≈ ‰ U‰ @ æ #œ 4" R J ÔR R 3 6 R 8" π 5" flz. π ƒ F f &r & nur Luftgeräusch > B. Tbn. r ? U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ U∑ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ≈ ‰ U‰ @ æ π #œ R J ÔR 3 6 R 4" 8" 5" π ƒ F f & Tuba ? U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r j rK ® ≈ ‰ U∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r ∑ U∑ #œ œ œ #œ π ƒ p 4" 8" 5" hard plastic mallets Tam Tam > Perc. I U j r ÷ ≈ & U∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ ‰ ∑ ‰ with‰ sticks ≈ Ë Ë ‡ ‡ ‰ ≈ ‡‡‡ ‡‡‡ ≈U‰ ‰ & f bœœ œœ. œœ œœ Ped. œ œ . œ œ 3 3 > p 5" 4" Snare Mute! 8" Woodblock snare on > f> Perc. II + > > ÷ ∑ ‰ with‰ sticks ≈ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ ∑ hard‰ mallets Ë ≈ ‰ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ Ë Ë ËËË≈ ‰ ËËËËËË Ë ≈ U‰ ‰ U @ æ U R J ÔR R R 3:2 6 R 8" 4" π f π p p ç 5" n>œ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ R ‰ j ‰ U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ & 4" nœ 8" Hp. n œ 5" ç Ï > j ? U∑ ∑ ‰ bœ ‰ U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ b >œ 4" 5" (II) 8" arco batt. arco batt. arco (III)F arco batt. 1-6 r h ï r r & U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ h@ œ ® ≈ ï ≈ ‰ U∑ & ‰ nœ ≈ ‰ ‰ nœ ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ∑ U∑ œ R > f > p #œ. œ. Vln. I 4" ƒ Ô ç P (II) 8" arco batt. 5" arco (III)F arco batt. arco batt. 7-12 r ï r r U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œh ® ≈ ≈ ‰ U∑ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ∑ U∑ & h@ ï & bœ bœ µ œ R > f > p œ. œ. 4" ƒ Ô ç P 5" (II) 8" arco batt. arco arco batt. arco batt. r (III)F 1-5 œ ï r r U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ@ ® ≈ ≈ ‰ U∑ & ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ∑ U∑ & ÔR ï nœ nœ n ƒ > f > p œ. œ. Vln. II 4" P 5" (II)ç 8" arco batt. arco arco batt. arco batt. r (III)F 6-10 œ ï r r U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ @ ® ≈ ≈ ‰ U∑ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ∑ U∑ & œ ÔR ï & bœ bœ ƒ 8" > f > p nœ œ 5" 4" P . . ç sul pont. arco #h h h h arco batt. U gliss. 1-4 # œ Uœ. œ œ r µ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ rK ® ≈ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ. œ. B J R nœ @R #œ π > R Vla. 4" Ø 8" f 5" ƒ sulπ tasto arco arco batt. nh h. h h r U gliss. 5-8 r n œ Uœ. œ œ nœ œ. œ. B U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ ® ≈ ≈ ‰ ‰ # ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ@ J R œ R ÔR π f > 5" 4" ƒ Ø 8" π pizz. arco batt. sul pont. arco arco batt. gliss. r U 1-3 ? U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r œ ® ≈ r ≈ ‰ U∑ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ r ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ œ. œ. œ@ R #>œ nœ nœ R Ô P > 5" Vc. 4" ƒ ç 8" f π pizz. arco batt. arco batt. sul tasto arco gliss. r U 4-6 ? U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r œ ® ≈ r ≈ ‰ U∑ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ r ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ nœ œ. œ. œ@ R #œ> #œ #œ R Ô P f > 5" 4" ƒ ç 8" π pizz. sul tasto arco arco batt. arco batt. gliss. r r U DB 1-6 ? U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r œ ® ≈ r ≈ ‰ U∑ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ @ #> œ #œ œ. œ. œ ÔR œ R f > ƒ ç P π 4 27 C 31

5" 5" 8" ˘ & & & & & & & & & #œ Picc. #œ œ œ œœœ œœœ ‰ ‰ ≈ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ U∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ R & 3 3 3 5" f P p 5" 8" ˘ & & & & & & & & & Tongue Ram #œ Fl. 1-2 #œ œ œ œœœ œœœ ‰ ‰ ≈ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ U∑ r ≈ ‰ U‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ R & 3 3 3 œ > f P 5" p 5" ç 8" & & & & & & Ob. 1-2 ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ U∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r & #œ 5" π 5" 8" π ﬂ p& & & & & & E. Hn. r ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ U∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ & p π #œ 5" 5" 8" π ﬂ

B Cl. 1-2 & & r r U r b & ‰ ‰ ≈ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ œ. œ. œ. œ ≈ ‰ ‰ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ n Ø F Ø œ p œ œ 5" 5" 8" fl 3 Slap Tongue π mit ton & & & & & & & r œ˘ B. Cl. ? ‰ ‰ ≈ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈& ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ U∑ ≈ ‰ U‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ # œ œ œœœ >œ R p œ œ ç 5" 5" 8" π mit ton & & & & & & Bsn. 1-2 r ˘ ? ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ œ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ œ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ U∑ #œ ≈ ‰ U‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ π > R 5" 5" ç 8" π & & & & & & > C. Bn. #œ r ? ‰ ‰ ≈ nœ œ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ U∑ ≈ ‰ U‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ π R œ 5" ç fl 5" 8" π mit ton senza sord. à 2 r r n>œ 1-2 ‰ ‰ ≈ U ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ U∑ U∑ ? ≈ ‰ ≈ r & œ œ. œ. œ #œ nœ π f R fl Hrn. 5" 5" 8" π mit ton senza sord. ƒ & r à 2 3-4 r nœ r ? ∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ U∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ pœ #>œ œ 5" 5" 8" ƒ π mit ton ˘ nur Luftgeräusch & senza sord. fl B Tpt. 1-2 r r #œ b ‰ ‰ ≈ ï& &ï & U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ U∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ p nœ> R 5" 5" 8" ƒ π mit ton p senza sord. & r Tbn. ? r nœ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï& ï& U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ U∑ #>œ ≈ ‰ ≈ fl π ƒ R 5" 5" 8" π mit ton p senza sord. B. Tbn. ? &r r r ‰ ‰ ≈ ï& ï& U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ U∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ #œ #œ #>œ fl 5" π 5" 8" ƒ π p & Tuba ? ‰ ‰ ≈ & & U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ U∑ r ≈ ‰ ≈ r #œ #œ œ p œ œ π > π > 3 5" ƒ 8" Xylophone Vibraphone Tam Tam L.V. 5" > with sticks #œ Perc. I ‰ ‰ ≈ nœ œ œ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‡‡‡ ‡‡‡ ≈ ‰ ‰ >Ë ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ® > & hard plastic mallets #œ ∑ ∑ U∑ U œ secco> R p 3 3 ƒ 5" π 5" p 8" Woodblock > Low Gong Perc. II > ÷ ∑ U∑ " " ≈ ‰ ËËËËËË """≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ U∑ Ë ≈ ‰ U‰ ‰ ‰soft mallets ≈ œ R π @R 5" 6 3 5" ƒ 8" P ƒ b>œ r ‰ ‰ ≈ U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ U∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ® & bœœ 5" 5" 8" œœ Hp. p >œ f L.V. ƒ ? ‰ ‰ ≈ U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ r ≈ ‰ U‰ ∑ r hit the lower strings b>œ with left hand Ï 5" 5" > 8" arco batt. arco sul tasto sul pont. arco batt. 3 ord. 1-6 r #g. g ‰ ‰ ≈ U∑ r ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ≈ #Uœ. œ ≈ ‰ U‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ r & # # ##g ` `. µ p œ œ. œ. >œ Pœ R >œ Vln. I fl 5" p π5" 8" f arco batt. arco sul tasto sul pont. ƒ arco batt. 3 gliss. ord. 7-12 ng g g. #g ‰ ‰ ≈ U∑ r ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ` n œ œ Uœ. # œ ≈ ‰ U‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ r & µ nng. µ p µ œ œ. œ. >œ Pœ. R >œ fl 5" p 5" 8" arco batt. sul tasto sul pont. π ƒ f arco batt. 3 arco pizz. arco ord. 1-5 ‰ ‰ ≈ U∑ r ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ r œ ≈ ‰ ‰ U∑ r ≈ ‰ U‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ r & nœ œ œ nœ œ `. nœ p . . > P R nœ > Vln. II fl 5" p 5" 8" arco batt. arco sul tasto sul pont.π f f arco batt. 3 pizz. arco ord. 6-10 ‰ ‰ ≈ U∑ r ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰ j œ ∑ U∑ r ≈ ‰ U‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ r & ` nœ arco batt.p œ œ œ pœ œ π #œ f > fl .3 . 5" > P 5" 8" ord. arco batt. arco sul tasto sul pont. f pizz. arco sul tasto r j 1-4 ` #œ #œ r B ® U∑ #œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰. #œ . ≈ ∑ U∑ n ≈ ‰ U‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ # R œ arco batt. œ œ œ P π R Vla. p fl .3 . 5" p> 5" f 8" ord. arco batt. arco sul tasto sul pont. ∏ pizz. arco sul tasto r 5-8 #œ œ r B ` ® U∑ nœ ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ œ ` ‰ ∑ U∑ ≈ ‰ U‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ nœ œ œ #œ arco batt.p > J R fl .3 . 5" p P π 5" f 8" ord. arco batt. sul tasto sul pont. pizz. ∏ arco arco ord. 1-3 #œ r r #œ r r ? # U∑ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ` ≈ ‰ ∑ U∑ ≈ ‰ U‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ p œ œ. œ. #œ #œ ` R #œ œ arco batt. fl > J Í Vc. 3 5" p P π 5" f 8" ord. arco batt. sul pont. arco sul tasto pizz. arco ord. 4-6 œ r œ r r ? œ œ œ U∑ nœ ≈ ‰ ‰ œ. ` ‰ ‰ ∑ U∑ nœ ≈ ‰ U‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ fl . . > œ arco batt.p p P f Í 3 5" π 5" 8" ord. arco batt. arco sul tasto pizz. sul pont. arco ord. DB 1-6 ? œ U∑ r ≈ ‰ ≈ r #œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ U∑ r ≈ ‰ U‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ r #œ œ œ #œ œ `. #œ œ fl . . > R p p P ∏ f Í 36 D 41 5 accel. e = 35 e = 60 5" whistle tone #œ. œ. œ. œ 3 Instabil ° 3 Picc. R & ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ≈ ‰ ‰ U∑ 16 ‰ œ 8 Ø p f whistle tone R halb luft / 5" halb ton nur luft Instabil ° Fl. 1-2 r j 3 3 & ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ U∑ ‰ œ ï ï 16 p 8 f π 5" R

Ob. 1-2 3 3 & ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ 16 ∑ 8 5"

E. Hn. 3 3 & ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ 16 ∑ 8

halb luft / nur luft 5" halb ton r j 3 3 Bb Cl. 1-2 & ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ bï ï ‰ ‰ U∑ 16 ∑ 8 f π halb luft / 5" mit ton halb ton nur luft & 3 r 3 B. Cl. ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ bï ï ‰ ‰ U∑ 16 ≈ ≈ #œ 8 R J 5" F f π >œ œ. œ. 3 œ 3 Bsn. 1-2 ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ U ® ≈ r R 16 ÔR nœ 8 Í 5" F π r rK flz. C. Bn. U 3 3 ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ® ≈ r >œ œ. œ. 16 œ #>œ@ 8 Í F ƒ 5" con sord. 3 nœ 3 1-2 bœ ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ∑ U∑ 16 ≈ ≈ R 8 p R p Hrn. 5" 3 con sord. 3 3-4 ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r ∑ U∑ ≈ ≈ r nœ 16 #œ 8 p 5" p nur Luftgeräusch B Tpt. 1-2 3 3 b ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï ï ≈ ‰ & U∑ 16 ∑ 8 R J R ß π 5" nur Luftgeräusch 3 3 Tbn. ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ? U∑ 16 ∑ 8 R J R ß π 5" nur Luftgeräusch 3 3 B. Tbn. ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ? U∑ 16 ∑ 8 R J R ß π 5" nur Luftgeräusch 3 3 Tuba ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ? U∑ 16 ∑ 8 R J R ß π 5" Tam Tam #œ with metal mallet 3 L.V. 3 Perc. I ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ R ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ ÷ œ ≈ ≈ hard mallets & 16 8 p R p 5" 3 L.V. 3 Perc. II ÷ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. Uœ. 16 œ ≈ ≈ 8 æ æ æ æ æ æ æ æ æ @R F 5" π bœ L.V. n>œ 3 3 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ R ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ? n œ ‰ ‰ U∑ ∑ & J 5" 16 8 Hp. ç p f 3 3 ? r j ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ bœ ‰ ‰ U∑ 16 ∑ 8 Ï b >œ > (II) 5" pizz. (III)F 3 arco batt. 3 1-6 r ï r r ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ U∑ & ≈ & ï ï 16 nœ µ>œ 8 Vln. I ƒ ƒ f π 5" pizz. 3 arco batt. 3 7-12 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œh œh ‰ ‰ U∑ r ≈ r & 16 # µ 8 R J œ >œ ƒ f (II) ∏ f 5" (III)F 3 (III) #œo 3 1-5 r ï R & ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï ‰ ‰ U∑ & 16 ≈ ≈ 8 Ø Vln. II ƒ 5" π tonlos r j am steg ∏ 6-10 3 3 & ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ ‰ ‰ U∑ 16 ≈ ≈ R 8 f ∏ π 5" ord. (II) (III) pizz. arco batt. F r 3 r 3 1-4 ...... ï B nœ B œ œ œ œ œ œ œ ≈ ‰ ≈ ï ï ‰ ‰ U∑ 16 ≈ nœ 8 æ æ R R Vla. F Ø ƒ 5" ƒ >f ord. π 3 pizz. arco batt. 3 5-8 ...... µ nœ r B œ œ œ œ œ œ œ ≈ ‰ ≈ œ œ ‰ ‰ U∑ 16 ≈ nœ 8 æ æ R R J 5" R (II) π >f F(III) arco fleggiero arcoƒ leggiero Ø (III)F arco batt. (IV) U 1-3 r r . 3 r 3 ? ≈ ‰ ≈ œ ≈ ? r œ. œ. œ. œ. gliss. #œœ. œœ. œœ œ œ. 16 œ œ 8 p π f > Vc. Í f 5"ƒ (III) arco batt. (IV) K 4-6 3 r r 3 ? æ @ æ Uæ ® ≈ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. gliss. µœ. µœœ œœµœœ µ œœ. œ. 16 >œ œ 8 Í f > f > ß 5" ƒ arco batt. > 3 3 DB 1-6 ? nœ. œ œ œ œ. Uœ. >œ ® ≈ r gliss. . . œ. œ. . @ æ æ 16 R œ 8 Ô f > ƒ ß ƒ 6 46 E 51 accel. e = 35 e = 50 °. °. °. °. ° Picc. 3 2 3 & 8 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ ® ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑ 8 ÔR Tongue Ram 3 °. °. °. °. ° 2 3 Fl. 1-2 ® ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ r ≈ ‰ & 8 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ 8 ï 8 R > Ô ç

Ob. 1-2 3 œ œ. œ. œ. œ. 2 œ 3 & 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ Œ ≈ R 8 8 π p

3 K 2 3 E. Hn. ∑ ∑ r® ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ & 8 #œ. œ. œ 8 8 π F mit ton 3 & 2 3 Bb Cl. 1-2 ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r ∑ ∑ & 8 #œ #œ. œ. 8 œ 8 Ø f P Slap Tongue 3 r 2 j r 3 B. Cl. ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ 8 #œ œ. œ. œ. œ. 8 œ #>œ 8 Íp f ç flz.

Bsn. 1-2 3 r 2 j r 3 ? ≈ æ ≈ 8 œ. œ. œ. œ #œ œ. œ. œ. œæ. 8 œ@ #>œ 8 Íp f ç ƒ flz.

C. Bn. 3 r 2 j r 3 ? æ æ æ ≈ æ æ ≈ 8 œ. œ. œæ. œ nœ œ. œ. œ. œ. 8 œæ >œ 8 π Íp f ç

3 # # 2 3 1-2 œ œ ﬂœ œ ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ J ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ 8 π 8 R 8 Hrn. ƒ π

3-4 3 2 # 3 ? ∑ ∑ ∑ nœ œ nœ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ œ 8 ﬂ 8 R 8 π ƒ π con sord.

B Tpt. 1-2 3 #œ œ. œ. œ. œ. 2 œ. #œ 3 b ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ & 8 R 8 8 π F slap tongue - "ft" con sord. r j r Tbn. 3 2 r 3 ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ n ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ 8 œ œ œ 8 #œ 8 Í π f fl con sord. slap tongue - "ft" 3 r j r 2 3 B. Tbn. ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ r 8 #œ œ œ 8 #œ 8 Í π f fl 3 j r 2 3 Tuba ? ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ #œ œ. œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 Í ƒ 8 8 3 2 3 Perc. I ÷ 8 œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ 8 œ ≈ ‰ 8 R R R R R R R R R R R R R ∏ π Ø 3 Temple Block 2 3 Perc. II œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ ÷ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ hard mallets 8 8 R R R R R R R Ø π √ 3 2 >Ú 3 ? 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ & 8 ‰ ≈ R 8 Hp. 3 f 2 Ï 3 ? 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ r ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑ 8 Ï > (II) sul pont. (I) 3 r r 2 3 1-6 ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ œœ & 8 #œ œ œ 8 R 8 Ï Vln. I Ø π 3 2 (III) #œo 3 7-12 r r R & 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ nœ œ œ ≈ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ‰ ≈ 8 Ø Ï ∏ 3 œo . œo . œo . œo . œo . œo . œo . œo . 2 œo œo arco batt. 3 1-5 J & œ 8 8 fl 8 Vln. II arcof batt. 3 ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. 2 ∏ ∏ 3 6-10 J & 8 8f œfl 8

(II) arco batt. (III) f 1-4 3 r 2 F r 3 B ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ ï 8 ƒ 8 8 Vla. ƒ (II) arco batt. (III) 5-8 3 r 2 F r 3 B 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ‰ ≈ ï 8 ƒ ƒ (IV) 1-3 3 r 2 3 ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ ≈ 8 # gliss. . 8 8 >œ œ. œ. œ. J R Vc. Í f π flautando (IV) 3 2 nœ 3 4-6 ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r . œ ≈ B ≈ gliss. . R 8 >œ œ. œ. 8 R 8 Í f π π 3 arco batt. 2 arco 3 DB 1-6 ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ r 8 >œ 8 #œ 8 P f 55 F 56 61 G 7 accel. e = 70

Picc. 3 2 3 & 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑ 8 ∑ ∑

Fl. 1-2 3 2 3 & 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑ 8 ∑ ∑

Ob. 1-2 3 œ 2 3 & 8 R ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∏ 3 2 3 E. Hn. ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ œ œ. œ. œ œ. œ ‰ ‰ & 8 8 8 J Ø π Ø 3 2 3 Bb Cl. 1-2 r ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ & 8 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ 8 8 F Ø 3 2 3 B. Cl. ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ r 8 8 œ 8 œ. œ. F

Bsn. 1-2 3 2 b 3 . . ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ B ‰ ≈ œ œ œ 8 8 R 8 π 3 2 3 C. Bn. ? 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑ 8 ∑ ∑

flz.

1-2 3 ...... 2 & 3 ? œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ ∑ ∑ 8 æ 8 æJ @ 8 Hrn. p f 3 flz. 2 3 3-4 ? œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ& ∑ ∑ 8 æ 8 æJ @ 8 p f

B Tpt. 1-2 3 2 3 b & 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑ 8 ∑ ∑ 3 2 3 Tbn. ? 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑ 8 ∑ ∑ 3 2 slap tongue - "ft" 3 B. Tbn. ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ r ‰ ‰ ‰ ∑ 8 8 #œ 8 f ﬂ 3 2 slap tongue - "ft" 3 Tuba ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ r ‰ ‰ ‰ ∑ 8 8 #œ 8 f ﬂ

Bass Drum Perc. I 3 2 3 ÷ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ hard mallets ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ 8 œ ≈ ‰ 8 œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ R R R R R R R R Ø 3 Temple Block 2 3 Perc. II ÷ 8 œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ 8 œ ≈ ‰ 8 œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ R R R R R R R R R R R R R p 3 2 3 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ r ∑ ∑ & 8 8 nœ 8 Hp. n œ 3 2 f > 3 ? r 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ‰ ≈ bœ 8 ∑ ∑ b >œ ◊ sul pont. ord.

gliss. 1-6 3 ...... 2B 3 œœ. œœ. œœ. œœ. œ . œ . œœ ≈ ≈ r ∑ ∑ & 8 8 # 8 R œ> Vln. I f 3 œo . œo . œo . œo . œo . œo . 2 œo 3 7-12 R ≈ ≈ r ∑ ∑ & 8 8 nœ 8 P f > (II) ord. (I) sul pont. gliss. 1-5 3 . . . . 2B 3 ∑ ∑ œœ. œœ. œ . œ . œœ ≈ ≈ r ∑ ∑ & 8 8 # 8 R œ> Vln. II Ø f 3 (III) #œo œo . œo . 2 œo 3 6-10 ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ R ≈ ≈ r ∑ ∑ & 8 8 nœ 8 Ø f f > 3 flautando 2 ord. 3 1-4 ï œ. œ. œ r ‰ B ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ≈ ≈ gliss. 8 ï 8 R œ> 8 œ. œ. Vla. Ø f Í π 3 flautando 2 ord. 3 5-8 ï œ œ. œ r ‰ B ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ gliss. 8 ï J 8 R œ> 8 œ. œ. Ø sul pont. f Í π sul tasto 1-3 3 œ œ. œ. œ. œ. 2 œ 3 œ. œ. ? 8 ∑ B ‰ 8 8 Vc. Ø π (II)#œo œo . œo . 4-6 3 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. 2 œ 3 B ≈ R 8 8 R ≈ 8 f ∏ pizz. r DB 1-6 3 2 r 3 ? ≈ ≈ #œ ∑ ∑ 8 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. 8 œ ƒ > 8 f 8 64 66 71 H accel.

> flz. > e = 90 & flz. #œ #œ œ. #œ #œ & & @ œ #œ Picc. ‰ ‰ ≈ >œ œ œ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ R æ R ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ≈ ≈ ≈ & @R æ Í f ç π ƒ f halb luft / nur luft & flz. halb ton mit ton & Ÿ~(~ ~)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ #œ œ > œ nœ Fl. 1-2 #œ œ. œ & ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ œ œ ‰ ‰ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ≈ #œ ≈ ≈ & @R æ @ J R R #œ π ƒ Í f π f & à 2 & œ & œ œ œ> œ & & Ob. 1-2 & #œ œ. #œ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ≈ #œ ≈ ≈ & R nœ R R œ R π f π ƒ F f& & & & r r E. Hn. & & r ‰ ‰ ≈ œ ‰ ‰ ≈ nœ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ. œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ #œ ≈ œ ≈ œ ≈ & bœ > R R π π ƒ f f halb luft F/ nur luft & halb ton à 2 & B Cl. 1-2 œ r j nœ œ >œ & & b ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ. œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ œ ≈ #œ ≈ #œ ≈ & R bœ œ F R R f π π ƒ f Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ B. Cl. > ? ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ bœ œ. œ ≈ ‰ ≈ r( ) œ. œ œ nœ @ æ n>œ œ œ. œ. sub. > R R f p π ƒ Í f à 2 > r r Bsn. 1-2 œ. œ œ bœ & r B ∑ ? ‰ ‰ ≈ r ‰ ‰ ≈ # ≈ ‰ ≈ œ œ. œ œ œ. œ. sub. πnœ > > F p π ƒ ß F & r & r r C. Bn. ? ‰ ‰ ≈ œ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r ‰ ‰ ≈ nœ œ. œ> ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ f πbœ π ƒ

flz. nœ& r & œ œ œ >œ 1-2 ? b>œ œ œ bœ ? ‰ ‰ ≈ R ‰ ‰ & ≈ #œ œ. œ œ #œ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ∑ ∑ & ƒ ç @R æ @ Hrn. p Íp Íp & flz. ƒ r & & r 3-4 r @ ? ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ ‰ ‰ ≈ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œæ œ@ œ ∑ ∑ #œ œ bœ œ œ bœ p p f Íp> ƒ> flz. > nœ œ œ >œ B Tpt. 1-2 & #œ œ. œ œ #œ& b ‰ ‰ ≈ r ‰ ‰ ≈ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ n œ œ œ œ ∑ ∑ & nœ R @R æ @ p Í Íp ƒ ç mit ton ƒ slap tongue - "ft" nur Luftgeräusch flz. nœ& r > Tbn. ? ‰ ‰ ≈ R ‰ ‰ ≈ nœ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ? ‰ ‰ ≈ bœ> œ œ bœ ∑ ∑ p fl @ @ p R J R R æ mit ton Íp ƒ slap tongue - "ft" ß π flz. & nur Luftgeräusch > B. Tbn. ? ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ ‰ ‰ ≈ r ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ? ‰ ‰ ≈ n>œ œ œ œ ∑ ∑ @ æ @ p R p #œ R J R R fl π Íp slap tongue - "ft" ß mit ton ƒ nur Luftgeräusch Tuba ? ? ‰ ‰ ≈ &r ‰ ‰ ≈ r ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ r ∑ ∑ # # p œ p #œ R J R >œ œ œ >œ fl ß π Íp ƒ

Perc. I ÷ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ œ. œ. >œ ≈ ‰ ‰ R R R R R R R R R æ æ R p Í ƒ Snare > Perc. II ÷ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ with sticks≈ œ œ. >œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ @ R R R æ R Ø Í ƒ √ nœ & ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ R ∑ ∑ Hp. gliss. Ï

? ‰ ‰ ≈ r ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r ∑ ∑ bœ p œ

(II) arco batt. (I) (III)F #>œ œ œ #>œ œ œ #>œ 1-6 œ #œ r rK r nh ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ & ≈ ∑ Œ ≈ ® ≈ ‰ ≈ n œ ≈ ‰ ≈ R & ï R #œ@ œæ. #>œ nnh@ @ f œ> R Í Vln. I (II)Ï Í ƒ (III)F arco batt. 7-12 œ nœ K r ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ∑ Œ ≈ r æ r® ≈ ‰ ≈ bbœh ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ & ï & R @ bh@ f #œ œ. #>œ b œ @R Ï Í > (II) (II) ƒ (III) ≥ (III) arco batt. F arco #œ ≥ F K r œ nœ 1-5 ‰ ‰ ≈ œ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ ∑ Œ ≈ r r® ≈ ‰ ≈ @ @ ≈ ‰ ≈ ï ∑ ≥ & ï & µ @ æ. µ œ R ï #œ f R œ œ >œ > Vln. II Ï Í ƒ (II) ƒ (II) arco batt. (III) (III) ç arco ≥ F r F œ 6-10 œ r rK #œ ï ≥ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ & ≈ nœ ∑ Œ ≈ æ ® ≈ ‰ ≈ # @ @ ≈ ‰ ≈ ∑ œ ≥ & ï µ œ@ œ. µ>œ œ R ï œ R (III) > Ï f (IV) Í ƒ ƒ K pizz.ç @ æ r 1-4 B #œ œ. œ œ nœ nœ. nœ ® ≈ ‰ ≈ #œ #œ ‰ ≈ nœ ∑ ∑ . #œ œ #œ œ. #>œ #œ f p Í(III) ƒ R R Vla. f (IV) ç K pizz. @ æ r 5-8 B #œ œ. œ œ nœ nœ. nœ ® ≈ ‰ ≈ nœ œ ‰ ≈ nœ ∑ ∑ . #œ œ #œ œ #>œ œ f p . R R f Í ƒ ç ord. arco batt. arco gliss. pizz. 1-3 œ. œ œ K r B ∑ ?#œ r® ≈ ‰ ≈ œ ‰ ≈ r ∑ ∑ œ #œ œ@ œæ >œ œ œ œ Vc. Ø ƒ ƒ ç arco batt. ƒ Í f arco π œo . œo œo gliss. pizz. > K 4-6 B ∑ ?#œ r® ≈ ‰ ≈ r #œ ‰ ≈ r ∑ ∑ œ #œ œ@ œæ. #>œ œ #œ nœ f ƒ ƒ ç π ƒ Í arco gliss. pizz. DB 1-6 œ œ œ >œ œ œ rK r œ r ? ‰ ‰ ≈ æ ® ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ ≈ ∑ ∑ R J œ #œ@ œ. #>œ nœ œ œ ç Í f Í f Í ƒ ƒ 73 76 81 9 I #œ >œ œ #>œ œ œ Picc. œ 2 & ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ R ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ R J R ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ 8 ∑ R 3 ƒ Í ƒ Í >œ Tongue Ram #>œ œ #>œ œ œ à 2 œ œ #œ œ œ 2 Fl. 1-2 ‰ ‰ ≈ r ∑ ∑ ‰ ® œ œ œ R ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ‰ ≈ r & œ 3 R J R 8 œ #œ ç œ Í 6 ƒ Í ƒ > > f Ob. 1-2 #œ œ œ 2 & ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ 8 ∑ R J R Í ƒ E. Hn. r j r 2 & ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ nœ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ 8 ∑ Í> ƒ r j r 2 Bb Cl. 1-2 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ & œ> œ œ 8 Í ƒ Slap Tongue Slap Tongue ˘ ~~~~~~~~~ >r j r r B. Cl. r r 2 ? ≈ #œ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ #œ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ‰ ≈ #œ œ fl 8 ç p f ç Í ƒ 2 Bsn. 1-2 ? ≈ r r ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ‰ ≈ r œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ 8 #œ . . . . . fl ƒ Í f ç r r j r 2 r C. Bn. ? ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ‰ ≈ #œ œ. œ #œ œ œ. œ 8 fl ç π Íp f ç

r j r ˘ 2 > 1-2 ‰ ≈ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ? ∑ ∑ ##œ. œ. ##œ ® ≈ ≈ nœ & nœ . œ. œ 8 #˘œ ∏ ÔR Hrn. ç> Íp ƒ ç r 3-4 bœ. œ 2 ? > ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ œ. œ. >œ ® ≈ ≈ nœ œ. œ 8 # ÔR flœ ç R Íp ƒ ç π à 2 flz. B Tpt. 1-2 #>œ. œ. œ #œ> œ œ. œ. 2 #œ b œ. œ. œ > n˘œ & ‰ ≈ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ @R æJ @ @ R ® ≈ ≈ J R 8 Ô R ∏ Í ƒ ç flz. ç r r 2 rK Tbn. ? ‰ ‰ ≈ n ≈ ‰ ‰ æ æ ® ≈ ≈ n˘œ >œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. 8 œ π ç> ∏ R f ç flz. + r r K B. Tbn. 2 r r ? ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ‰ ‰ æ ® ≈ ≈ #œ> œ. œ. œ. œ. œ #œ. œæ. 8 œ #œ f π ç ∏ fl > ç > 2 Tuba ? ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ r j r ≈ ‰ ‰ K ® ≈ ≈ r r œ œ œ 8 r œ œ > #œ . π Íp ∏ >œ. œ. œ fl ç ç ∏ ç 2 Perc. I > ÷ ∑ œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ∑ ‰ >œ ≈ ‰ >œ ≈ ‰ >œ ≈ ‰ >œ ≈ ‰ >œ ≈ ‰ >œ ≈ ‰ >œ ≈ ‰ 8 >œ ≈ œ œ >œ>œ>œ>œ R R R R R R R R R R ƒ f F π f Perc. II 2 ÷ ‰ ‰ ≈ >œ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ‰ ≈ >œ R R f ƒ 2 nœ & ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ? 8 ‰ ≈ bœ Hp. R f 2 r ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ 8 bbœ ◊ gliss. sul tasto œ œ #œ œ. œ. œ. molto vib. > ˝ ˝ >˝ ˝ ˝ > > r 1-6 ˝ ˝ ˝ ˝ ˝. 2 œ ® ≈ ≈ bœ & 8 ÔR > Vln. I f f ƒ sul tasto (I) #>œ œ œ #>œ œ. œ œ #>œ œ œ #>œ œ œ #>œ œ œ#>œ œ. >œ molto vib. 7-12 2 r & ‰ ‰ ≈ R 8 ÔR ® ≈ ≈ Nœ Í f ƒ f> >œ œ œ œ œ sul pont. #œ #>œ œ . . . . senza vib. œ œ œ œ 2 1-5 #œ œ j œ œ R r & ∑ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ Ô ® ≈ ≈ #œ nœ sub.œ. œ œ 3 8 > 3 f Vln. II ƒ 6 p ∏ ƒ >œ œ œ œ œ sul pont. #œ #>œ œ . . . . senza vib. œ œ œ œ 2 6-10 #œ œ j œ œ R r ∑ ‰ ≈ œ œ Ô ® ≈ ≈ n & œ 3 8 œ n sub.. œ œ œ œ 3 > ƒ 6 f p ƒ ∏ pizz. arco œ œ pizz. arco (II) ord. r œ œ r 2 1-4 B ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ≈ ≈ #œ œ œ #œ œ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ n>œ œ œ#œ œ. œ #œ çœ 8 R ç ƒ 6 Vla. 6 f pizz. arco œ œ pizz. arco (IV) ord. r œ œ r 2 5-8 B ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ≈ ≈ #œ œ œ #œ œ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ b>œ œ œ#œ œ. œ #œ œ 8 R ç ƒ 6 ç 6 sul pont.f arco 2 K nœ 1-3 r r @> ? ‰ ‰ ≈ æ æ æ æ ® ≈ ≈ R œ œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. 8 >œ Vc. f Íp ƒ f sul pont. arco 4-6 r 2 rK #>œ ? ‰ ‰ ≈ æ æ æ æ ® ≈ ≈ @R œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. 8 >œ f Íp ƒ f pizz. pizz. (IV) arco r 2 DB 1-6 ? ‰ ‰ ≈ œ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ j ≈ #>œ #œ 8 œ @R R ƒ fl fl ç f 10 82 86 91

5" e = 40

Picc. 3 2 & U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑ 5"

Fl. 1-2 3 2 & U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑ 5"

Ob. 1-2 3 2 & U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑ 5"

E. Hn. 3 2 & U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑ 5" à 2 B Cl. 1-2 3 2 r b & U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ‰ ≈ #œ p 5" 3 2 B. Cl. ? U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ r 8 8 nœ p 5" 3 2 Bsn. 1-2 ? U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ r 8 8 nœ 5" p 3 2 C. Bn. ? U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ r 8 8 bœ π 5" senza sord. 3 2 1-2 ? U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑ Hrn. 5" senza sord. 3 2 3-4 ? U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑

senza sord. 5"

B Tpt. 1-2 3 2 b & U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑ 5" senza sord. 3 2 Tbn. ? U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ∑ 5" senza sord. 3 2 B. Tbn. ? U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ r 8 8 #œ 5" p ﬂ 3 2 Tuba ? U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ r 8 8 #œ p ﬂ Suspended Mute! 5" Cymbal with mallets > > > > Perc. I 3 + 2 ÷ U∑ 8 ∑ ‰ ≈ Ë ‰ ≈ ‡ ‡ ‡ Ë ∑ ∑ ∑ Œ ≈ Ë ∑ ∑ 8 ‰ ≈ Ë R @ æ @ R R 5" soft mallets p ç p p Low Gong > > > Perc. II 3 2 ÷ U∑ 8 Ë ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ Ë ‰ ≈ Ë ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ Ë ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ Ë ≈ Ë ∑ ∑ ∑ 8 ‰ ≈ Ë ÷ R R R R R R 5" π F bœ 3 2 n˘œ ? U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ & Œ ≈ R ∑ ∑ ? ‰ ≈ bœ 5" 8 8 Hp. p π R 3 2 r ? U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ 8 8 bbœ œ 5" höchste Note möglich ◊ ord. (I) > gliss. à arco batt. Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1-6 U 3 ( ) œ œ . . 2 œ œ œ œ œ bœ nœ œ œ . ÔR ® ≈ ≈ & 8 . . . . gliss. 8 5" Í p œ. œ. > höchste∏ Note möglich Vln. I ord. Í (I)> gliss. à arco batt. Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 7-12 U 3 ( ) œ #œ . . 2 bœ . ÔR ® ≈ ≈ & œ 8 œ. œ. œ œ œ œ. œ. gliss. 8 Í p œ. œ. 5" > Í höchste∏ Note möglich ord. (I)> gliss. à arco batt. Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1-5 U 3 œ œ . . 2 ( œ ) . ÔR ® ≈ ≈ & œ 8 œ. œ. œ œ #œ œ. œ. gliss. 8 p œ. œ. Vln. II 5" Í> Í höchste∏ Note möglich ord. (I) gliss. à arco batt. Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > 6-10 3 . . 2 U (b œ ) . œ œ R œ œ œ œ œ nœ œ #œ gliss. Ô ® ≈ ≈ & 8 . . . . 8 œ. œ. 5" Í p > Í höchste∏ Note möglich > (I)> gliss. à arco batt. Ÿ(~ ~ )~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~gliss.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1-4 U 3 œ œ nœ . . 2 B œ 8 œ. œ. œ œ nœ œ. œ. œ. 8 ÔR ® ≈ ≈ 5" p œ. œ. Vla. Í Í ∏ Ÿ>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > gliss. arco batt. U 3 (n ) 2 5-8 B œ œ. œ. œ œ bœ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ bœ . rK ® ≈ ≈ 8 . 8 œ œ œ 5" ∏ . . ord. Í Í p gliss. Ÿ(~ ~) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (IV) arco batt. œ œ œ œ œ œ bœ œ œ gliss. > 1-3 3 . . > . . . . 2 ? U @ œ œ . rK ® ≈ ≈ #˘œ æ 8 æ æ æ 8 R 5" œ Vc. ord. Í Í ∏ f gliss. Ÿ(~ ~)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (IV)> arco batt. # # # œ gliss. 4-6 Uœ 3 œ. œ. œ œ >œ œ. œ. . . 2 ? @ œ œ . rK ® ≈ ≈ #˘œ æ 8 æ æ æ 8 R 5" œ Í Í ∏ f > > gliss. arco batt. U 3 Ÿ~(~ œ ~) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2 K DB 1-6 ? #œ #œ. #œ. #œ œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ #œ . r ® ≈ ≈ r 8 @ . 8 #œ #˘œ æ æ æ æ f Í Í ∏ 93 J 96 101 11

4" 4" 5" 10" e = 60 & &3 & & & & nur luft Picc. 3 #œœœ 3 œ& 3 U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ U∑ U∑ U∑ ≈ ï ï ï & 8 3 5" 16 R 8 10" π f 4" p 4" 3 gliss. mit lippen nur luft & & & & & U U Fl. 1-2 3 nœ œ œ. œ. 3 3 U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ Œ ≈ U∑ œ ≈ & 8 16 R ï ï ï 8 f 4" p 4" P 5" 10" π à 2 Ob. 1-2 3 & & 3 & & & 3 & U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ U∑ U∑ U∑ 16 ≈ ≈ œ œ œ 8 3 4" 5" 4" π& & 10" p E. Hn. 3 3 & & & 3 & U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ œ U∑ U∑ U∑ 16 ≈ ≈ œ œ œ 8 4" π 3 4" 5" 10" flz. p nur luft & & B Cl. 1-2 U 3 r & & 3 3 b & œ 8 œæ. œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ U∑ U∑ U∑ 16 ≈ ≈ 8 n ï ï 4" ∏ pœ œ 4" 5" flz. 10" f 3 & & 3 nur luft & & 3 B. Cl. ? U æ r ≈ ‰ ‰ Œ ≈ U∑ U∑ U∑ ≈ ≈ œ 8 œ. œ. œ #œ œ 16 ï ï 8 ∏ 10" 4" p 4" 5" f flz. & & Bsn. 1-2 3 Uœ. 3 œ #œ 3 ? U r ≈ ‰ ≈ U∑ U∑ B ≈ 8 æ #œ œ 16 R R 8 4"œ œ. œ. œ. œ ∏ π 4" 5" π 10" F Í 3 & & 3 3 C. Bn. ?U r ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ U∑ U∑ U∑ ≈ ≈ r œ 8 œ. œ nœ œ 16 #œ 8 π Íp ∏ 4" 4" 5" 10" à 2 nur Luftgeräusch 3 3 nœ 3 1-2 & ? n œ ? U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï Uï. œ ≈ ‰ U‰ U∑ 16 ≈ ≈ 8 R R Hrn. 4" p 4" π 5" 10" ç 3 à 2 nur Luftgeräusch 3 3 3-4 & ? #œ ? U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï Uï. œ ≈ ‰ U‰ U∑ 16 ≈ ≈ # œ 8 R R 4" 10" p 4" π 5" ç nur Luftgeräusch B Tpt. 1-2 3 & & 3 #œ 3 b U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï ≈ ≈ & 8 U∑ U∑ U∑ & 16 R 8 4" 5" 10" f p 4" 3 nur Luftgeräusch 3 3 Tbn. & & ? ? U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï U∑ U∑ Uï. 16 ï ≈ ï 8 R R 4" 10"π P p 4" 5" ç 3 nur Luftgeräusch 3 3 B. Tbn. & & ? ? U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï U∑ U∑ Uï. 16 ï ≈ ï 8 R R 4" π p 4" 5" 10" P ç nur Luftgeräusch mit ton Tuba 3 & & 3 3 ? U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ï ï ? ≈ ≈ r 8 U∑ U∑ U∑ 16 #œ 8 f f 4" Tam Tam 4" 5" 10" 3 with sticks 3 3 Perc. I > > > ÷ U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ ËËË >ËËËËË ‰ U‰ Ë Ë ≈ ‰ U‰ ËËË ≈ ‰ U‰ & 16 ∑ 8 3 5 3 4" 4" 10" π p Í 5" Í Claves > Perc. II 3 3 3 ÷ U∑ 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ Œ ≈ Ë Ë ËËË≈ ‰ U‰ Ë>Ë®≈ ‰ U‰ >ËËË≈ ‰ U‰ 16 ∑ 8 3 3 3 4" Í Í F √ 4" 5" 10" 3 >œF >œF >œ F 3 n˘œ 3 ? U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ‰ & R ≈ ‰ U‰ R ≈ ‰ U‰ R ≈ ‰ U‰ ? bœ ≈ ≈ & 8 4" 5" 16 8 Hp. 4" 10" R F p 3 3 r 3 ? U∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ U∑ U∑ ≈ ≈ 8 16 bbœ 8 (II) 10" sul tasto arco leggiero ◊ 4" (III) arco batt. 4" 5" (II) senza vib. F 3 3 arco leggiero (III) F 3 3 1-6 ï. ï U ï #œ U∑ ï. . ® ≈ ‰ & ≈ U∑ U∑ ï. ® ≈ & 8 ÔR µ œœœ p 16 ÔR R 8 Vln. I (II) P . . sul tastoÍ 4" (III) π π fl (II) 10" senza vib. arco batt. 4" 5" arco leggiero F arco leggiero 3 (III) F 7-12 3 ï. ï 3 ï #œ 3 U∑ . ® ≈ ‰ & ≈ U∑ U∑ U ® ≈ & 8 ï. ÔR µ œœœ pï. 16 ÔR R 8 (II) π P π fl . . 5" 10" Í 4" (III) arco batt. 4" tonlos sul tasto 3 Farco leggiero am steg ∏ ∏ ∏ senza vib. 1-5 3 ï. ï U. U. 3 #œ 3 U∑ . ® ≈ ‰ ≈ U∑ ® ≈ 8 ï. R & œœœ 16 ÔR R 8 Ô µ ∏ 10" Vln. II (II) π P π fl . . 5" sul tastoÍ 4" (III) arco batt. 4" tonlos senza vib. F arco leggiero 3 am steg ∏ ∏ ∏ 6-10 3 ï. ï U. U. 3 #œ 3 U∑ . ® ≈ ‰ & ≈ U∑ R ® ≈ 8 ï. ÔR œœœ 16 Ô R 8 P µ ∏5" (II) π π arco batt. fl . . senza vib. 10" sul tastoÍ 4" (III) 4" (III) senza vib. arco leggiero F 3 (IV)sul tasto rK (II) 1-4 3 ï. ï U U 3 # 3 B U∑ . ® ≈ ‰ B ≈ U∑ nœ. œ. œ ® ≈ œ 8 ï. ÔR #œœœ #œ. œ. 16 œ R 8 (II) P senza vib. π5" Vla. 4" π π fl. . 4" 10" Í (III) arco batt. (III) (II) sul tasto F arco leggiero 3 (IV)sul tasto rK senza vib. 5-8 3 ï. ï 3 3 B U∑ . ® ≈ ‰ B ≈ U∑ #Uœ. Uœ. œ ® ≈ #œ 8 ï. ÔR #œœœ nœ. œ. 16 œ R 8 (II) π P π . . π 10" Í 4" arco batt. fl 3 4" senza vib. 5" senza vib. (III) sul tasto F arco leggiero (III) sul tasto (I) 1-3 3 ï. ï 3 K #œ 3 U∑ ¸. ® ≈ ‰ ? ≈ U∑ U U r ® ≈ B 8 ï. R œœœ nœ œ 16 œ R 8 P Ô pfl . . π. . Vc. (II) π π 5" 10" P 3 4" senza vib. (I) 4" (III) arco batt. senza vib. F arco leggiero (III) sul tasto sul tasto 4-6 3 ï. ï U 3 rK #œ 3 U∑ ¸. ® ≈ ‰ ? ≈ œœœ U∑ U ® ≈ B 8 ï. R . . #œ œ 16 œ R 8 Ô fl π. 10". (II) π P π p 5" P 4" (III) 4" arco batt. 3:2 senza vib. sul tasto F arco leggiero 3 sul tasto 3 rK 3 DB 1-6 ï. ï ? U U r ? U∑ ¸. ® ≈ ‰ ≈ # U∑ #œ. œ. œ ® ≈ 8 ï. ÔR œœ. œ. 16 #œ 8 π P π p fl π P 12 102 K 106 L accel. e = 80 e = 90 Picc. 3 & 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Fl. 1-2 3 & 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Ob. 1-2 3 & 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

E. Hn. 3 & 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ Œ ≈ œ #œ Íp

B Cl. 1-2 3 b & 8 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 3 mit ton B. Cl. ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ j 8 œ #œ œ œ. œ. Íp 3 œ œ œ œ œ œ Bsn. 1-2 B 8 ...... f p 3 C. Bn. ? 8 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. f

à 2 3 œ. œ 1-2 ? œ. œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ #œ œ 8 R R J Hrn. ∏ Íp 3 à 2 4 3-4 ? œ. œ œ ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ 8 œ #œ œ œ œ #œ- œ- œ- J R Íp ∏ B Tpt. 1-2 3 œ. œ. œ b ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ & 8 R ∏ 3 Tbn. ? ∑ ∑ ≈ 8 œ #œ œ œ. #œ- œ- œ- œ. Íp f 3 B. Tbn. ? ∑ ‰ ≈ j 8 œ #œ œ œ. #œ- œ- œ- œ. œ. Íp 3 f Tuba ? r ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ 8 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ ∏ gliss. Xylophone œ nœ 3 n >œ # Perc. I ∑ ∑ ≈ œ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ & 8 hard mallets #œ R R ç with sticks ƒ Snare ricochet ƒ Perc. II 3 > > ÷ 8 >Ë ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ˘ËË. Ë. Ë. ‰ ≈ >Ë ‰ ‰ ∑ Ë Ë ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ R R f √ 3 >œ r >œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ ‰ ∑ ‰ ≈ ‰ & 8 R b>œ R Hp. ƒ ƒ 3 f r ? œ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ œ r ≈ 8 gliss. gliss. œ œ ◊ ord. sul tasto ◊ molto vib. senza vib.

1-6 3 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. & 8 Vln. I Pord. π sul tasto molto vib. senza vib.

7-12 3 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. & 8 ord. P π sul tasto molto vib. senza vib.

1-5 3 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. & 8 Vln. II ord.P π sul tasto molto vib. senza vib.

6-10 3 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. & 8 P ord. π sul tasto 3 molto vib. senza vib. 1-4 B 8 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. Vla. ord.P π sul tasto 3 molto vib. senza vib. 5-8 B 8 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. P sul pont. π 3 1-3 B œ. œ. œ. #œ. #œ. #œ. 8 æ æ æ Vc. f π 3 sul pont. 4-6 B œ. œ. œ. #œ. #œ. #œ. 8 æ æ æ f π 3 DB 1-6 ? æ æ æ 8 œ. œ. œ. #œ. #œ. #œ. f π 108 111 13 accel. flz. mit ton œ#œ œ. Picc. & ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ Œ ≈ æ Íp mit ton œ#œ œ œ. œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ. Fl. 1-2 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ J J & 5 Íp

Ob. 1-2 œ# . # - - # -. . # ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ & J J 5 Íp f 4 E. Hn. ‰ ∑ & œ. œ. œ #œ- œ- œ- #œ. œ. œ. œ f ∏ mit ton 5 B Cl. 1-2 j j b & ∑ œ#œ œ œ œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ. œ. œ #œ œ. œ ‰ Íp f ∏ 5 4 B. Cl. ? j r ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ œ. œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ. œ #œ œ œ œ. œ f - - - ∏

Bsn. 1-2 œ œ #œ œ. œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ. œ #œ- œ- œ- #œ. œ. œ B ≈ ‰ ? 5 J 4 f p f

C. Bn. ? r ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ œ. œ π

------1-2 ? œ #œ œ œ œ. œ. œ #œ œ œ #œ. œ. œ ‰ ∑ 4 4 Hrn. f ∏

3-4 ? ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ f ∏

B Tpt. 1-2 œ#œ œ œ œ. œ œ #œ œ œ œ b ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ & J 5 Íp 4 Tbn. ? ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ # œ. œ- œ- œ- œ- œ π

B. Tbn. ? r ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ œ. œ ∏

Tuba ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

œ > # # œ Perc. I ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ œ>œ ‰ ∑ ‰ ≈ œ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ÷ & R nœ R ç ç ricochet Perc. II ÷ ∑ ˘ËË. Ë. Ë. ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ ˘ËË. Ë. Ë. ‰ ˘ËË. Ë. Ë. ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ Ë ∑ R f ç bœ bœ œ & ∑ ∑ ∑ ≈ R ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ ‰ Hp. f r ç ? ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ œ r ≈ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ r ‰ ∑ gliss. œ bœ ◊ ord. sul pont. #œ gliss. . 1-6 œ œ #œ œ. œ. . . . & R ≈ Vln. I F Íp ƒ ord. sul pont. #œ gliss. . 7-12 œ œ #œ œ. œ. . . . & R ≈ Íp ƒ ord. sul pont. F #œ gliss. . 1-5 œ œ #œ œ. œ. . . . & R ≈ Vln. II ƒ F ord.Íp sul pont. #œ gliss. . 6-10 œ œ #œ œ. œ. . . . & R ≈ Íp ƒ F ord. sul pont. #œ gliss. 1-4 . . . . B œ œ #œ œ. œ. R ≈ Vla. F ƒ ord.Íp sul pont. #œ gliss. 5-8 . . . . B œ œ #œ œ. œ. R ≈ F ord.Íp sul pont. ƒ #œ gliss. . . 1-3 œ œ #œ œ. œ. . . B R ≈ ?

Vc. f ord.Íp sul pont. ƒ #œ gliss. . . 4-6 œ œ #œ œ. œ. . . B R ≈ ? f Íp ƒ

DB 1-6 ? #œ gliss. . . ≈ œ œ #œ œ. œ. . . R f Íp ƒ 14 116 M 121

gliss. mit lippen - - - - > 4" e = 100 œ #œ œ œ œ #œ . . . . > œ. . œ œ œ œ œ - - - Picc. @ #œ œ œ >œ æ æ R ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ‰ ≈ R R ≈ ≈ ® ≈ U‰ & 3 3 R ƒ π ƒ p ƒ π ƒ 4" . . > . . > - - - - > œ. œ œ œ œ .œ .œ .œ .œ .œ œ œ œ .œ .œ .œ .œ .œ œ . . . . > > Fl. 1-2 #œ œ œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ- œ- œ- œ J R ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ® ® ≈ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ œ œ ≈ ≈ ® œ œ œ œ ≈ U‰ & 5 5 ÔR R 3 R 3 R ƒ π ƒ π ƒ π ƒ p ƒ π ƒ 4" - - - - > Ob. 1-2 œ. œ . . . . > ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ œ œ ≈ ≈ œ œ œ œ œ ® œ- œ- œ- >œ ≈ U‰ & R R 3 R 3 R ƒ π ƒ π ƒ 4" 3 p ƒ 3 r r r E. Hn. . . . . & œ œ œ œ >œ Ù‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ nœ œ œ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ #œ œ œ œ ≈ U‰ R - - - - > - - - > Ô π ƒ π ƒ 4" p ƒ 3 rK r r 3 B Cl. 1-2 r b & œ. œ. œ. œ. œ ® ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ nœ œ œ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ U‰ > - - - - > n-œ œ- œ- œ p ƒ π ƒ > 5 π 3 ƒ 4" K 3 r B. Cl. . . . . > r r r ? #œ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ # ® ® ‰ ≈ ® ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ≈ ® # ≈ U‰ œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ -œ -œ -œ œ> R p ƒ π ƒ π...... >ƒ - - - - > Ô π ƒ p ƒ π ƒ 4" p ƒ 5 3 #œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ K - - - - > Bsn. 1-2 r #œ œ œ œ #œ r ? R ® ≈ ‰ #œ œ œ œ œ ® œ œ œ œ œ ® ‰ ≈ ® ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ U‰ Ô . . . . > . . . . > œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ R 3 R ...... > œ- œ- œ- œ> p ƒ p ƒ π ƒ π ƒ π ƒ π ƒ 4" rK ...... > - - - - > C. Bn. # # - - - > ? nœ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ ® ® ‰ ≈ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ œ œ œ œ ≈ U‰ . . . . > nœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ R 3 R . . . . > . . . . > 5 ÔR 3 R p ƒ p ƒ π ƒ π ƒ π ƒ π ƒ 4" . . . . > . . . . > . . . . > #œ œ œ œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ ...... > - - - 1-2 ? ® ≈ ‰ ® ® ∑ ≈ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ >œ ® ≈ ∑ ‰ ≈ bœ œ œ œ œ ® bœ œ œ >œ ≈ U‰ ÔR 5 ÔR 3 R Hrn. p ƒ p ƒ π ƒ π ƒ p ƒ π ƒ 4" rK ...... > 3 3-4 ? nœ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ nœ œ œ œ œ ® œ œ œ œ œ ® ∑ ≈ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ >œ ® ≈ ∑ ‰ ≈ nœ œ œ œ œ ® r ≈ U‰ . . . . > . . . . > . . . . > nœ œ œ œ 5 ÔR - - - p ƒ p ƒ π ƒ π ƒ p ƒ π ƒ> 4" - - - > B Tpt. 1-2 œ. œ. œ. œ - - - - > #œ œ œ œ b ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ U‰ & R 3 R R 3 R f 5 ∏ π ƒ π ƒ 4" . . . . . - - - > Tbn. . . . . > > œ- œ- œ- œ- >œ nœ œ œ œ ? #œ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ #œ. œ. œ. œ. œ ® œ. œ. œ. œ. œ ® ‰ ≈ #œ. œ. œ œ œ œ œ #œ ®#œ. œ. œ œ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ ≈ ≈ ≈ nœ. œ. œ. œ. œ ® ≈ U‰ > > . . . . . > R 3 R > 3 R ÔR p ƒ π ƒ π ƒ π 5 ÔR p ƒ p ƒ 5 π ƒ π ƒ 4" ƒ 3 3 . . . . . r r r B. Tbn. rK # > ? ® ≈ ‰ ® ® ‰ ≈ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ ® œ. œ. œ œ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ ≈ #œ œ œ œ #œ ≈ ≈ ® #œ œ œ œ ≈ U‰ #œ œ œ œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ ...... > R - - - - #œ œ œ œ œ - - - . . . . > . . . . > . . . . > π ƒ 5 Ô > . . . . > > p ƒ p ƒ π ƒ 5 π π ƒ p ƒ π ƒ 4" 5 ƒ 3 3 r r Tuba ? rK ® ≈ ‰ ® ® ‰ ≈ ® rK ® ≈ ‰ ≈ ≈ ≈ ® r ≈ U‰ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ nœ œ œ œ œ #œ. œ. œ. œ. œ #œ. œ. œ. œ. œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ ...... > #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ - - - - > > œ œ œ œ p >ƒ p . . . . >ƒ π. . . . >ƒ π ƒ π...... ƒ> π ƒ p ƒ π- - - ƒ> 4" Suspended hard mallets Cymbal Mute! Perc. I + + + + ÷ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ ® ∑ ≈ œ œ œ ≈ ∑ ∑ œ œ œ >œ ≈ U‰ æJ R æR @ æR æJ R 3 R π ƒ π ƒ π ƒ π ƒ 4" Mute! Perc. II + + ÷ ∑ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ œ> ≈ ≈ œ œ œ+ ® U∑ æJ R æR æJ R f R æR @ π ƒ π ƒ π ƒ 4" b>œ œ b>œ b>œ œ > b>œ b œ r bœ> R œ R >œ & ‰ R ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ∑ ≈ ‰ R ≈ ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ R ≈ U‰ Hp. n>œ R R 4" f r r r ? ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ bœ ≈ ≈ ∑ ≈ ‰ r ≈ ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ r ‰ ≈ U‰ r œ r bœ bœ nœ r > bœ bœ > > b>œœ bœ> > >œ b>œœ (II) 4" (II) (II) pizz. arco batt. (III) F c.l. batt. arco (III) F arcoF(III) 1-6 ï r r ï r ï >œ ‰ ≈ ‰ r ≈ ≈ r ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ r ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ ≈ U‰ & ï ï & µ µ #œ ï ï & # ï & R Ï >œ >œ > œ> Vln. I ƒ (II) (II) π (II) π Ï arco batt. 4" ƒ arco ƒ pizz. arco (III) (III)F c.l. batt. (III)F F 7-12 ï r r r r ï r r ï r & ‰ ï ï ≈ & ‰ µ ≈ ≈ ∑ nœ ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ & ≈ ‰ ≈ ï ‰ & ≈ U‰ Ï >œ n>œ > nœ> œ ƒ (II) > (II) π (II) π Ï (III) arco batt. 4" (III) ƒ arco (III) ƒ pizz. arco F c.l. batt. F F 1-5 ï r r ï r ï ‰ ≈ ‰ r ≈ ≈ r ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ r ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ r ≈ U‰ & ï ï & µ #œ ï ï & n ï & µ ÏN>œ >œ > œ> œ Vln. II ƒ > (II) π (II) π Ï (II) 4" ƒ ƒ pizz. arco arco batt. (III) F c.l. batt. arco (III) F F(III) 6-10 ï r r ï r ï ‰ ≈ ‰ r ≈ ≈ r ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ r ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ r ≈ U‰ & ï ï & nœ ï ï & b ï & µ ÏN>œ n>œ > œ> œ ƒ Ï > (II) π (II) π arco batt. 4" ƒ arco ƒ pizz. (III) F c.l. batt. (III) F > 1-4 ï r r r r ï r r r ‰ ≈ B ‰ ≈ ≈ ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ B ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ µ œ ≈ U‰ B ï ï n>œ n>œ œ ï ï #œ nœ Ï ƒ> > R Vla. π π Ï 4" (II) (II) pizz. arco batt. (III) ƒ c.l. batt. arco (III) ƒ F r F > 5-8 ï r r r ï r r r µ B ‰ ≈ B ‰ ≈ ≈ ∑ œ ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ B ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ U‰ ï ï Ï n>œ n>œ > ï ï nœ> #œ ƒ Ï R π π arco batt. 4" pizz. ƒ c.l. batt. arco pizz.ƒ µ r r r r r 1-3 ? ‰ r ≈ ‰ ‰ >œ ≈ ≈ ∑ ≈ ‰ r ≈ ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ ≈ U‰ œ nœ >œ œ #œ nœ µœ R ƒ > > Vc. f Ï f Ï pizz. arco batt. 4" c.l. batt. arco pizz. 4-6 r µ>œ r r r r r r ? ‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ ∑ nœ ≈ ‰ ≈ #œ ‰ µœ ≈ U‰ œ R nœ >œ œ > > f Ï ƒ f Ï arco batt. 4" pizz. c.l. batt. arco pizz. r DB 1-6 ? ‰ r ≈ ‰ ‰ n>œ ≈ ≈ r ∑ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ∑ r ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ r ≈ U‰ œ n>œ œ œ #œ #œ µ œ R > > > f Ï ƒ f Ï 123 126 15 4" . . . . > . . . 10" #œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ #œ Uœ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ œ œ œ ˘œ Picc. ÔR ® ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ R J R ≈ ≈ ® R ≈ ≈ U∑ ÷ & 3 π ƒ p ƒ 4" p ƒ ƒ π ƒ 10" ...... > ...... > . . . . œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ . . . . > . . . ˘ Fl. 1-2 #œ œ œ œ >œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ® ‰ ≈ ® ® ≈ ‰ ≈ œ Uœ œ ≈ ≈ ® œ ≈ ≈ œ œ œ œ U∑ ÷ & œ œ œ œ œ 5 5 ÔR R J R R 3 ÔR π 4" ƒ 10" p ƒ p ƒ π ƒ π ƒ p ƒ ƒ π ƒ > . . . Ob. 1-2 . . . . ˘ & œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ ® ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ œ Uœ œ ≈ ≈ œ œ œ œ œ ® œ ≈ ≈ œ œ œ œ U∑ ÷ 4" R 3 ÔR R J R 10" ƒ ƒ p ƒ π p ƒ π 3 ƒ r j r r E. Hn. . . . . U & œ œ œ œ >œ ® ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ nœ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ #œ ≈ ≈ œ œ œ œ U∑ ÷ π ƒ . . . fl ÔR 4" ƒ π ƒ 10" p ƒ rK r Uj r 3 Bb Cl. 1-2 ∑ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ ≈ ‰ ‰ r ≈ ≈ U∑ ÷ & œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ nœ œ œ π ƒ œ œ œ œ œ 4" . . . fl 10" p ƒ 5 ƒ π 3 ƒ . . . . > K r B. Cl. r r Uj r ? #œ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ œ œ œ œ ® ‰ ≈ # # ® ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ≈ œ œ œ œ œ ® #œ ≈ ≈ œ œ œ œ U∑ ÷ . . . . œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. >œ œ œ œ . . . . > . . . ÔR > . . π ƒ fl π ƒ π ƒ 4" p ƒ ƒ π ƒ 10" p ƒ 5 . . . . > 3 Bsn. 1-2 #œ œ œ œ œ rK ? ® ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ œ œ œ œ ® ‰ ≈ ® ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ Uœ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ r ≈ ≈ U∑ ÷ ÔR . . . . > œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ R J R œ œ œ œ œ . . > π ƒ . . . fl 10" p ƒ π ƒ π ƒ 4" ƒ π ƒ K r ...... > . . . ˘ C. Bn. ? ® ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ® ‰ ≈ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ #œ Uœ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ œ ≈ ≈ œ œ œ œ U∑ ÷ nœ. œ. œ. œ. >œ œ œ œ œ œ p . . . . > 5 R R J R 3 ƒ Ô π ƒ R π ƒ π ƒ ƒ π ƒ 4" 10" ...... #œ œ œ œ >œ œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ >œ ...... > . . . ˘ 1-2 ? ® ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ® ∑ ≈ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ >œ ® ≈ U∑ ‰ ≈ bœ œ œ œ œ ® bœ ≈ ≈ œ œ œ œ U∑ ÷ ÔR 5 ÔR R 3 Hrn. p ƒ p ƒ π ƒ π ƒ 4" p ƒ ƒ π ƒ 10" rK ...... > 3 3-4 ? nœ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ≈ nœ œ œ œ ≈ ≈ œ œ œ œ œ ® ∑ ≈ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ >œ ® ≈ U∑ ‰ ≈ nœ œ œ œ œ ® r ≈ ≈ U∑ ÷ ...... > nœ nœ œ œ œ > 5 ÔR 4" . . . p ƒ p ƒ π ƒ π ƒ p ƒ ƒ π. . . ƒ˘ 10" > . . . fl B Tpt. 1-2 ...... > U #œ œ œ œ œ b œ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ≈ œ œ œ œ œ ® ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ U∑ ÷ & 3 R R J R R Ô 10" p ƒ 5 π 4" ƒ ƒ π ƒ p ƒ . . . . > ...... ˘ Tbn. > œ Uœ œ œ œ œ œ œ ? #œ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ≈ #œ œ #œ œ œ ® ≈ œ œ œ œ œ ® ‰ ≈ #œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. #>œ ®#œ. œ. œ œ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ ≈ ≈ ≈ nœ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ≈ U∑ ÷ . . . . > . . . . > R J R . . . . > R 3 ÔR p ƒ π ƒ π ƒ π 5 ÔR 4" p ƒ 10" 5 π ƒ ƒ π ƒ p ƒ ƒ 3 . . . . . r j r r B. Tbn. rK # > U ÷ ? ® ≈ ≈ ® ≈ ® ‰ ≈ #œ. œ. œ œ œ œ œ #>œ ® œ. œ. œ œ œ œ œ œ ® ≈ ‰ ≈ #œ œ œ ≈ ≈ ® #œ ≈ ≈ œ œ œ œ U∑ #œ œ œ œ œ #œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ . . . . . R #œ œ œ œ œ . . . fl . . . . > ...... 5 Ô π ƒ . . . . 10" p ƒ p >ƒ π >ƒ π 5 ƒ π 4" p >ƒ ƒ π ƒ 5 ƒ 3 r j r Tuba ? rK ® ≈ ≈ ® ≈ ® ‰ ≈ ® rK ® ≈ ‰ ≈ U ≈ ≈ ® r ≈ ≈ U∑ ÷ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ nœ œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ #œ. œ. œ. œ. œ #œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ > œ. œ. œ œ œ œ œ œ . . . . > œ œ. œ. œ. flœ p >ƒ p . . . . >ƒ π. . . . >ƒ π ƒ π . . . . .ƒ> π ƒ p ƒ ƒ π ƒ

4" L.V. 10" Perc. I + + + + > ÷ œ œ ≈ ≈ œ œ œ ≈ œ œ œ ® ‰ ‰ œ œ œ >œ ≈ ‰ ‰ U∑ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ+ ® ‰ ≈ œ œ œ œ U∑ æJ R æR @ @ æR @ 3 R æR @ 3

π ƒ π ƒ π ƒ π ƒ 4" π ƒ π ƒ L.V. 10" Perc. II + + + ÷ œ œ ≈ ≈ œ œ œ ≈ œ œ œ+ ® ∑ ≈ œ œ œ ≈ ∑ ‰ ≈ œ œ œ+ ® ‰ ≈ œ œ œ >œ ∑ @ @ æ U U æJ R æR R @ æR æJ R 4" æR @ 3 10" π bƒœ π ƒ π ƒ π ƒ π ƒ π ƒ œ nœ r r r Ÿ~~r~~~~j~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ‰ ≈ ‰ ≈ ‰ ≈ R ∑ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ ≈ ( )U U & R nœ œ bœ œ bœ œ œ. œ. œ. Hp. π f P 10" r r r ? ‰ ≈ ‰ ≈ r ‰ ≈ bœ ∑ ≈ ‰ r ≈ ∑ ∑ ∑ U∑ œ bœ œ œ œ œ bœ nœ 4" 10" arco pizz. arco arco batt. 3 @ @ r r @ @ r 1-6 ‰ œh ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ U∑ r ≈ ‰ œh ≈ r ‰ ≈ U∑ & h nœ œ # # h # #œ œ > > œ œ œ œ œ >œ œ œ> > Vln. I ƒ Ï fl . fl . . 4" ƒ Ï 10" arco batt. arco pizz. arco 3 @ @ r r @ @ rK 7-12 ‰ œh ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ U∑ r ≈ ‰ œh ≈ r ‰ ≈ U∑ & h bœ nœ µ µ µ h œ œ > > œ œ œ œ œ >œ œ nœ> > ƒ Ï fl . fl . . 4" ƒ Ï 10" arco batt. arco pizz. arco 3 1-5 œ r r œ r r ‰ œ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ U∑ r ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ ≈ U∑ & @ nœ œ n n n @ nœ nœ @ > > œ œ œ œ œ >œ @ > > Vln. II Ï fl . fl . . 4" Ï 10" ƒ arco batt. arco ƒ pizz. arco 3 œ r r œ r 6-10 ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ U∑ r ≈ ‰ ≈ r ‰ ≈ U∑ & œ @ bœ nœ œ @ b bœ @ œ œ œ œ œ œ @ œ> > Ï > > . . . > ƒ ƒ fl fl 4" Ï (II) 10" arco batt. con sord. arco 3 arco (III) > µ˘ . 1-4 #œ r œ œ #œ œ. B ‰ #œ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ nœ ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ U∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ nœ Uœ. ƒ #œ R > #œ œ œ ∏ Vla. Ï fl . . 4" R 10" arco batt. arco pizz. arco 3 >œ r ˘ . r r 5-8 @ nœ œ @ r B ‰ @ œ ‰ ‰ R ≈ ≈ #œ ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ U∑ nœ ≈ ‰ @ œ ≈ nœ ‰ ≈ #œ U∑ ƒ œ Ï > nœ œ œ > œ > fl . . 4" ƒ Ï > 10" arco batt. 3 arco pizz. arco . 1-3 @ r ˘ r @ r ? ‰ œ@ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ r ∑ #œ œ ≈ ‰ ≈ U∑ ≈ ‰ œ@ ≈ ‰ ≈ r U∑ œ nœ nœ #œ œ œ #œ œ #œ #œ ƒ > > fl . . > ƒ > > Vc. Ï 4" Ï 10" arco batt. 3 arco pizz. arco r ˘ . r r 4-6 ? ‰ @ œ@ ‰ ‰ ≈ ≈ r ∑ nœ œ ≈ ‰ ≈ U∑ ≈ ‰ @ œ@ ≈ ‰ ≈ r U∑ œ #œ #œ œ œ œ nœ œ nœ nœ ƒ > > fl . . > ƒ > > Ï 4" Ï 10" arco batt. arco pizz. arco 3 > r r DB 1-6 ? ‰ @ œ@ ‰ ‰ œ ≈ ≈ ∑ ≈ ‰ ≈ U∑ r ≈ ‰ @ œ@ ≈ r ‰ ≈ U∑ œ #œ œ #œ œ œ # n # œ ƒ œ R > . >œ œ œ> > Ï fl fl . . ƒ Ï 16 131 N 136

e = 60 nur Luftgeräusch Picc. > > > ÷ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ïï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ R R R 3 R R R π p nur Luftgeräusch Fl. 1-2 > > > ÷ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ïï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ∑ R R R 3 R R R π mundstück abnehmen p und in das Instrument blasen Ob. 1-2 > > > ÷ ∑ ∑ nur Luftgeräusch ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ïïï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ R R R 3 R R R π mundstück abnehmen p und in das Instrument blasen E. Hn. > > ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ nur Luftgeräusch ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ïï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ R R R 3 R R π p nur Luftgeräusch B Cl. 1-2 > b ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ R R R π nur Luftgeräusch B. Cl. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ R R π

Bsn. 1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

C. Bn. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

nur Luftgeräusch 1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ R R Hrn. π

3-4 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

B Tpt. 1-2 b ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Tbn. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

B. Tbn. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Tuba ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Bass Drum ricochet Perc. I ˘ . . ˘ . . ˘ . . ˘ . . ˘ . . ˘ . . ˘ . . ˘ . . ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ with stick∑ at edge of drum ËËË≈ ‰ ËËË≈ ‰ ËËË≈ ‰ ËËË≈ ‰ ËËË≈ ‰ ËËË≈ ‰ ËËË≈ ‰ ËËË≈ 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 hard mallets Woodblock ∏ p Perc. II ÷ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ ∑ R R R R R R R R R R R R π p ∏ √ L.V. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ n>œ r & ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ≈ R ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ Hp. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ Ø p ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ≈ r ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ b>œ ◊ arco leggiero (II) (III)F 1-6 ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑

Vln. I (II) (III) p F arco leggiero 7-12 ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰

(II) (III) p arco leggiero 1-5 Fï ï ï ï ï ï ï ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰

Vln. II (II) (III) p Farco leggiero 6-10 ï ï ï ï ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰

- gliss. p 1-4 œ. œ. œ. œ œ #œ œ. . . Âœ œ Âœ œ. B œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ œ. Vla. P π arco P π ricochet ˘ . ˘ . . . ˘ ˘ . . . 5-8 B ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ œ œ ≈ ‰ œ œ œ œ ‰ œ ® ≈ ‰ œ œ œ œ ‰ ‰ ÔR arco π ricochet rK 1-3 ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ #œ œ ≈ ‰ œ œ œ œ ‰ #œ ® ≈ ‰ #œ œ œ œ ‰ ‰ #œ œ ≈ ‰ œ œ œ ® ‰ #œ œ œ œ ‰ fl . fl . . . fl fl . . . fl . fl . . fl . . . Vc. π p arco ricochet sul tasto K 4-6 ? ∑ ∑ ≈ ‰ ‰ r® ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ≈ ‰ ® ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰ # # # # # # # œ œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ arco πfl fl fl fl fl . pfl fl fl π ricochet sul tasto ord. rK r DB 1-6 ? #œ œ ≈ ‰ œ œ œ œ ‰ #œ ® ≈ ‰ #œ œ œ œ ‰ ‰ #œ œ ≈ ‰ œ œ œ ® ‰ #œ œ œ œ ‰ #œ œ œ œ ‰ ‰ ‰ #œ œ œ œ ≈ ...... πfl fl fl fl fl pfl fl fl π P 140 141 146 17

Picc. > ÷ ï. ï. ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ R Í ∏

Fl. 1-2 > ÷ ∑ ï. ï. ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ R Í ∏

Ob. 1-2 > ÷ ∑ ∑ ï. ï. ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ R Í ∏ E. Hn. > ÷ >ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ï. ï. ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ R R Í ∏ B Cl. 1-2 > > > b ÷ ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ï. ï. ï ≈ ‰ ‰ 3 R R R R p Í ∏ B. Cl. > > > > ÷ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ïï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ï. R 3 R R R mundstück abnehmen p Í und in das Instrument blasen Bsn. 1-2 > > > ÷ ∑ ∑ nur Luftgeräusch ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ R R R 3 R R R p π mundstück abnehmen und in das Instrument blasen C. Bn. > > ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ nur Luftgeräusch ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ R R R 3 R π p

1-2 > > > > ÷ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ïï ï ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ï. R R R R Hrn. 3 p Í nur Luftgeräusch 3-4 > > > ÷ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ï ï ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ R R R 3 R R R π p nur Luftgeräusch B Tpt. 1-2 > > > b ÷ ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ï ï ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ R R R 3 R R R π p nur Luftgeräusch Tbn. > > ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ïï ï ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ R R R 3 R R π nur Luftgeräusch p B. Tbn. > > > ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ïï ï ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ R R R 3 R R π p nur Luftgeräusch Tuba > > > ÷ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ïï ï ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ∑ R R R 3 R R R π p

Perc. I ˘ ˘ ˘ ˘ ˘ ˘ ˘ ˘ ˘ ˘ ÷ ‰ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 p Ø Snare Perc. II with flexible mallet ˘ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ˘ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ˘ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ˘ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ˘ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ˘ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ˘ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ˘ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ˘ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ricochet 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 √ L.V. ∏ p n>œ √n>œ & ∑ ≈ R ‰ ‰ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ R ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ Hp. p ? ∑ ≈ r ‰ ‰ ∑ ‰ ‰ ≈ r ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ b>œ b>œ ◊ ◊

1-6 ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ & Vln. I π ∏ 7-12 ï ï ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ &

π ∏ 1-5 ï ï ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ & Vln. II π ∏ 6-10 ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ &

gliss. π ∏ 1-4 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. . #œ. œ. B œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. Vla. sul tasto ord. P ˘ ˘ ˘ ˘ . . ˘ . . . 5-8 B œ œ. ≈ ‰ œ œ. œ. ® ‰ œ œ. œ. œ. ‰ œ œ. œ. œ. ‰ ‰ ‰ œ œ. œ œ ≈ œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ œ œ œ œ ‰ ‰ R p sul tasto π ord. P p π r 1-3 ? #œ œ œ œ ‰ ‰ ‰ #œ œ œ œ ≈ #œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ #œ œ œ œ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ . . . . fl . . fl . . . Vc. π P p π ord. 4-6 ? r ≈ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ # # # œ. œ œ œ œ. œ œ. œ. œ. P p. πfl fl DB 1-6 ? #œ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ #œ œ œ œ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ . . . . . p πfl 18 149 O 151 P 156

Picc. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Fl. 1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Ob. 1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

E. Hn. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

B Cl. 1-2 b ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

B. Cl. ÷ ï. ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ R ∏

Bsn. 1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ >ï. ï. ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ R Í ∏

C. Bn. ÷ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ >ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ >ï. ï. ï ≈ ‰ ‰ R R R Í ∏

1-2 > > > ÷ ï. ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ≈ ï ï ï. ï. R R R R J Hrn. ∏ p Í Í 3-4 > > ÷ ï. ï. ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ R R p Í ∏ B Tpt. 1-2 > b ÷ ∑ ∑ ï. ï. ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ R Í ∏ Tbn. > > ÷ ï ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ï. ï. ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ R R Í ∏

B. Tbn. > ÷ ‰ ï ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ï. ï. ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ R R Í ∏

Tuba > ÷ ∑ ï. ï. ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ R

Í hard mallets ∏ Xylophone √ Perc. I #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ ÷ ∑ ∑ & R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ Ø Ø Perc. II ˘ ˘ ˘ ˘ ˘ ˘ ÷ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ËË. Ë. ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 3 3 3 3 3 3 √ L.V. ∏ √ L.V. √ L.V. n>œ n>œ n>œ & ≈ R ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ≈ R ‰ ‰ ∑ ≈ R ‰ ‰ ∑ Hp. p ? ≈ r ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ≈ r ‰ ‰ ∑ ≈ r ‰ ‰ ∑ b>œ b>œ b>œ pizz. ◊ ◊ mit der linken Hand ◊ tonlos (I) #œ. œ. #œ. #œ. œ. #œ. #œ. œ. #œ. arco am steg ∏ 1-6 & R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ ∑ Œ ≈ R Vln. I p ∏ ∏ pizz. (I) mit der linken Hand #œ. œ. #œ. #œ. œ. #œ. #œ. œ. #œ. 7-12 & ∑ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ ∑ p ∏ pizz. (I) mit der linken Hand #œ. œ. #œ. #œ. œ. #œ. #œ. œ. #œ. 1-5 & ∑ ∑ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ Vln. II p ∏ pizz. (I) mit der linken Hand #œ. œ. #œ. #œ. œ. #œ. #œ. œ. 6-10 & ∑ ∑ ∑ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ p

1-4 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. B œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ.

Vla. (IV) π c.l. batt. 5-8 B ∑ ∑ ∑ nœ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ nœ ≈ ‰ nœ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ nœ ≈ ‰ nœ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ R R R R R R R R (IV) ∏ p c.l. batt. r r r r r r r r r 1-3 ? ∑ ∑ #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ ∏ p Vc. (IV) c.l. batt. 4-6 ? ∑ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ ∑ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ ∏ p π (IV) c.l. batt. r r r r r r r r r DB 1-6 ? #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∏ p π 157 161 Q 19

Picc. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Fl. 1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Ob. 1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

E. Hn. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

B Cl. 1-2 b ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

B. Cl. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Bsn. 1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

C. Bn. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

1-2 > > > > ÷ ï ï ï ï ≈ ≈ ï ï ï. ï. ï ï ï. ∑ ∑ ∑ R R J 2 Hrn. Í F ∏ 3-4 > > > > > > ÷ ï ≈ ≈ ï ï ï. ï. ï ï ï ï ≈ ≈ ï ï ï. ï. ï ï ï. ∑ R R J R R J 2 Í Í Í F ∏ B Tpt. 1-2 > b ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ R p

Tbn. > > > > > ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ≈ ï ï ï. ï. ï ï ï ï ≈ ≈ ï ï R R R J R R J p Í Í Í F B. Tbn. > > > ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ≈ ï ï ï. ï. R R R J p Í Í Tuba > > > > > > > ÷ ∑ ï ≈ ‰ ‰ ï ≈ ≈ ï ï ï. ï. ï ï ï ï ≈ ≈ ï ï ï. ï. ï ï R R R J R R J 2 p Í Í Í F

Perc. I (#√œ ) œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ & R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ π

Low Gong L.V. Perc. II ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ metal∑ mallets Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ R R R √ L.V. π n>œ & ≈ R ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ Hp.

? ≈ r ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ b>œ ◊

∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. 1-6 & Vln. I tonlos p arco am steg ∏ ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. 7-12 & Œ ≈ R

∏ tonlos p arco am steg ∏ ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. 1-5 & ∑ Œ ≈ R Vln. II ∏ tonlos p #œ. arco am steg ∏ ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. 6-10 & ‰ R ≈ ‰ ∑ Œ ≈ R ∏ ∏ p gliss. 1-4 œ œ #œ- œ. . . Âœ œ Âœ œ. œ. œ. B œ œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ œ. œ. œ. Vla. P π arco batt. P π 5-8 B ‰ nœ ≈ ‰ nœ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ nœ ≈ ‰ ∑ nœ. œ. ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ nœ. œ. ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ R R R R π ∏ r r r r r r r r r r r r 1-3 ? #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰

Vc. c.l. batt. 4-6 ? ∑ ∑ ‰ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ #œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ p f tonlos arco am steg DB 1-6 ∏ ∏. ∏. ∏. ? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ Œ ≈ R ∏ 20 165 166 171

Picc. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Fl. 1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Ob. 1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

E. Hn. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

B Cl. 1-2 b ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

B. Cl. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Bsn. 1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

C. Bn. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ Hrn.

3-4 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

B Tpt. 1-2 > > > > > > b ÷ ï ≈ ≈ ï ï ï. ï. ï ï ï ï ≈ ≈ ï ï ï. ï. ï ï ï. ∑ R R J R R J 2 Í Í Í F ∏ Tbn. > > ÷ ï. ï. ï ï ï. ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ 2 ∏ B. Tbn. > > > > ÷ ï ï ï ï ≈ ≈ ï ï ï. ï. ï ï ï. ∑ ∑ ∑ R R J 2 Í F ∏ Tuba ÷ ï. ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∏ (√) Perc. I #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ & R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ p

Perc. II ÷ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ R R R R R R R R R R R R p √ L.V. n>œ & ≈ R ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ Hp. π ? ≈ r ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ b>œ ◊ ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏ 1-6 & R ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ Vln. I Ø ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. 7-12 &

∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. 1-5 & Vln. II ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. 6-10 &

gliss. Â 1-4 œ. œ. œ. œ. . nœ. œ. œ. B œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. Vla. p 5-8 B nœ. œ. ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ nœ. œ. ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ nœ. œ. ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ nœ. œ. ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ p r r r r r r r r r r r r 1-3 ? #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰

Vc.

4-6 ? r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ

∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. DB 1-6 ? P 173 176 181 21

Picc. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Fl. 1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Ob. 1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

E. Hn. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

B Cl. 1-2 b ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

B. Cl. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Bsn. 1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

C. Bn. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

1-2 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ Hrn.

3-4 ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

B Tpt. 1-2 b ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Tbn. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

B. Tbn. ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

Tuba ÷ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

(√) Perc. I #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ & R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ R ≈ ‰ ∏

Perc. II ÷ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ Ë ≈ ‰ R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R ∏

& ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ Hp.

? ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑

1-6 & ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ Vln. I ∏ 7-12 & R ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ Ø ∏. ∏ 1-5 & R ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ Vln. II Ø ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏ 6-10 & R ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ Ø

gliss. gliss. 1-4 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. . #œ. œ. nœ B œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ ≈ ‰ ‰ R Vla. Ø 5-8 B nœ. œ. ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ nœ. œ. ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ nœ. œ. ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ nœ. œ. ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∏ r r r r r r r r r 1-3 ? #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ #œ ≈ ‰ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∏ Vc.

4-6 ? r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ‰ r ≈ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ #œ œ #œ #œ œ ∏

DB 1-6 ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏. ∏ ? R ≈ ‰ ‰ ∑ Ø