HORN AND LIVE ELECTRONICS A SURVEY OF AND PERFORMANCE GUIDE FOR A NEGLECTED REPERTOIRE
Garrett Nathaniel Krohn
A Dissertation
Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS
May 2021
Committee:
Andrew Pelletier, Advisor
Carolyn Tompsett Graduate Faculty Representative
Ryan Ebright
Nora Engebretsen © 2021
Garrett Krohn
All Rights Reserved iii
ABSTRACT
Andrew Pelletier, Advisor
The purpose of this document is to explore works written for horn and live electronics.
This repertoire is considerably smaller compared to other instruments’ and the existing pieces are not widely considered to be part of the standard repertoire. The author’s intention is that this document will raise an awareness of the sonic possibilities of this genre to promote performances of the existing pieces and inspire new commissions. Eight pieces were obtained via the composers and are analyzed from the viewpoint of both performer and pedagogue. This document explores Silhouettes, Receding (2012) by Jay Batzner (b.1974) for Bruce Bonnell,
Ghost Circles (2013) by Jay Batzner for Bruce Bonnell, Recombinant Serenade (2013) by
Christopher Biggs (b.1979) for Lin Foulk Baird, Nisi (2012) by Kevin Ernste (1973) for Adam
Unsworth, Horn Call (1976) by Randall Faust (1947), Gently Weep (2009) by Thomas
Hundemer, Zylamander (2011) by Russell Pinkston (b. 1949) for Luke Zyla, and Pulsar [Variant
I] (2013) by Seth Shafer. iv
For Hannah v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank all of the composers who graciously sent me the scores and electronics for their precious works. Each and every one of them was a pleasure to interact with and it was an honor to analyze such incredible pieces. Thank you as well to the commissioners/ performers of these works, who were very helpful in my research and analysis.
Thank you to my committee for helping me through this process, especially to my chair and mentor Dr. Andrew Pelletier. He has helped me in more ways than I can list, and I am forever grateful for all he has done for me over the past 5 years of studying with him.
Last but not least I want to thank my family for always believing in me. To my mom and dad, Brett and Melissa, thank you for supporting me in my interests and always encouraging me to be the best person I can be. I want to give the biggest thank you to my beautiful wife, Hannah.
You have been my cheerleader and my rock through life. I cannot imagine this world without you, you are my everything. vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1
The Compositional Challenges of Live Electronics ...... 7
Overview of Softwares ...... 11
Pieces Reviewed ...... 13
CHAPTER II. COMPOSERS AND PERFORMERS ...... 15
Batzner, Jay Silhouettes, Receding and Ghost Circles ...... 15
Biggs, Christopher Recombinant Serenade ...... 18
Ernste, Kevin Nisi ...... 20
Faust, Randall Horn Call ...... 22
Hundemer, Thomas Gently Weep ...... 23
Pinkston, Russell Zylamander ...... 24
Shafer, Seth Pulsar [Variant 1] ...... 25
CHAPTER III. A SURVEY OF AND PERFORMANCE GUIDE FOR THE REPERTOIRE ... 27
Method of Analysis ...... 27
Average Pitch ...... 27
Average Pitch Weighted for Duration ...... 28
Average Interval ...... 28
Order of Composition ...... 28
Batzner, Jay Ghost Circles ...... 30
Overview ...... 30
Horn Part ...... 31
Electronics ...... 32 vii
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations ...... 32
Articulation Exercises ...... 33
Upper Register ...... 33
Bb4 ...... 33
Biggs, Christopher Recombinant Serenade ...... 34
Overview ...... 34
Horn Part ...... 37
Electronics ...... 37
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations ...... 38
Drum Beats ...... 38
Vocalize Rhythms ...... 38
Low Range Flexibility ...... 38
Ascending Scales ...... 39
Shafer, Seth Pulsar [Variant 1] ...... 40
Overview ...... 40
Horn Part ...... 42
Electronics ...... 43
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations ...... 44
Horn Choir Section Effect ...... 44
Angular Lines ...... 44
Midrange Articulation ...... 44
Rhythmic Subdivision ...... 45
Ernste, Kevin Nisi ...... 46 viii
Overview ...... 46
Horn Part ...... 47
Electronics ...... 49
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations ...... 50
Coordination of On and Off Mic ...... 51
Bell Coordination ...... 51
Use of Highlighters for Music ...... 52
Hundemer, Thomas Gently Weep ...... 53
Overview ...... 53
Horn Part ...... 54
Electronics ...... 56
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations ...... 56
Natural Horn Technique ...... 56
Angular Lines ...... 56
Batzner, Jay Silhouettes, Receding ...... 57
Overview ...... 57
Horn Part ...... 59
Electronics ...... 60
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations ...... 60
First Section Almost All Closed with Right Hand Technique ...... 60
Lip Trill Stopped from F-Ab ...... 61
A Ab Gb F Figure ...... 61
Play Pitch Valved, Then Stopped ...... 61 ix
Sing Lines ...... 62
Pinkston, Russell Zylamander ...... 63
Overview ...... 63
Horn Part ...... 64
Electronics ...... 67
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations ...... 67
Conceptualize the 4/8 Section as 4/4 ...... 67
Measures 170-177 ...... 68
Faust, Randall Horn Call ...... 69
Overview ...... 69
Horn Part ...... 70
Electronics ...... 70
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations ...... 71
Practice with a Metronome ...... 71
Rhythmic Precision ...... 71
Natural Horn ...... 71
CHAPTER IV. CONSIDERATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 72
Effective Techniques ...... 73
Conclusion ...... 77
BIBLIOGRPAHY ...... 79
APPENDIX A. CONTEMPORARY HORN PLAYERS ...... 84
APPENDIX B. RECOMMENDED STANDARD WORKS ...... 87
APPENDIX C. NATURAL HORN RESOURCES ...... 90 x
APPENDIX D. PIECES CONSIDERED BUT NOT USED ...... 91 xi
LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page
1 Fixed Electronics and Live Electronics Flow Chart ...... 8
2 Example of Max/MSP Patch ...... 12
3 Example of SuperCollider Patch ...... 13
4 Kevin Ernste Nisi Graphic User Interface ...... 49
5 Kevin Ernste Nisi Example of Highlighted Music ...... 52 xii
LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES Table Page
1 Jay Batzner Ghost Circles mm. 6 ...... 31
2 Benjamin Britten Serenade mm. 4 ...... 35
3 Christopher Biggs Recombinant, Serenade mm. 33-34 ...... 36
4 Christopher Biggs Recombinant, Serenade mm. 56-57 ...... 39
5 Seth Shafer Pulsar [Variant 1] mm. 6-9 ...... 41
6 Seth Shafer Pulsar [Variant 1] mm. 83-86 ...... 41
7 Seth Shafer Pulsar [Variant 1] mm. 97-98 ...... 42
8 Kevin Ernste Nisi mm. 11-13 ...... 47
9 Kevin Ernste Nisi mm. 3-5 ...... 48
10 Kevin Ernste Nisi mm. 48 ...... 48
11 Kevin Ernste Nisi mm. 83 ...... 49
12 Thomas Hundemer Gently Weep mm. 72-73 ...... 55
13 Thomas Hundemer Gently Weep Measures 1-5 ...... 55
14 Jay Batzner Silhouettes, Receding mm. 176-187 ...... 60
15 Jay Batzner Silhouettes, Receding mm. 23 ...... 61
16 Russell Pinkston Zylamander mm. 74-75 ...... 65
17 Russell Pinkston Zylamander mm. 146 ...... 65
18 Russell Pinkston Zylamander mm. 160 ...... 66
19 Russell Pinkston Zylamander mm. 170-177 ...... 66
20 Jay Batzner Silhouettes, Receding mm. 1-16 ...... 74
21 Christopher Biggs Recombinant Serenade mm. 1 ...... 74
22 Seth Shafer Pulsar [Variant 1] mm. 81-82 ...... 75 xiii
23 Kevin Ernste Nisi mm. 83 ...... 76 xiv
LIST OF TABLES Table Page
1 Jay Batzner Ghost Circles ...... 30
2 Christopher Biggs Recombinant Serenade ...... 34
3 Seth Shafer Pulsar [Variant 1] ...... 40
4 Kevin Ernste Nisi ...... 46
5 Thomas Hundermer Gently Weep ...... 53
6 Jay Batzner Silhouettes, Receding ...... 57
7 Russell Pinkston Zylamander ...... 63
8 Randall Faust Horn Call ...... 69
1
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION
Since the 1980s evolving digital technology has afforded new performance possibilities for performers of what is sometimes termed contemporary western art music. Especially recently, the evolution of technology has made equipment relatively affordable and has allowed musicians to be self-sufficient. Technology that was initially so expensive that only institutes of higher education and the professional recording industry could afford it has transformed into personal computers that are easily operated by the performer and incredibly portable. This new technology has fostered new genres, such as live electro-acoustic music, which combines an acoustic instrument with live, interactive electronics. Electro-acoustic (hereafter EA) music can be traced back to musique concrète pieces like Pierre Schaeffer and Pierre Henry’s Symphonie pour un homme seul (1950). There was also experimentation and composition with live electronics such as John Cage’s Cartridge Music (1960), which used amplification, and
Stockhausen’s Mikrophonie I and Mixture (both 1964), which featured electronic transformation through filtering. Composers then explored works for live performer and tape, such as Milton
Babbitt’s Philomel (1964).1 Live-EA music has quickly become one of the most prominent trends in contemporary art music of the past several decades.
Horn players who are interested in this genre have a number of challenges that do not exist, at least not to the same extent, for other instrumentalists. First, there are very few horn-specific resources about this genre available to either interested performers or teachers. Second, there is
1 J. Peter Burkholder, Donald Jay Grout, and Claude V. Palisca, A History of Western Music Eighth Edition, (New York and London W.W. Norton & Company, 2010), 945.
2
no standard repertoire of pieces that are widely known, performed, and taught. The main reason for this is that standard repertoire takes time to form. For now, the best that horn players can do is curate pieces and make individual decisions about what pieces should be performed and taught. Finally, this genre’s repertoire is smaller in comparison to other instruments’. To put this into perspective there are recent dissertations that have looked at horn and electronics and have listed the known repertoire at the time. In 2017, Erika Binsley Loke has identified 34 pieces that are currently available for horn and fixed media.2 Compare this to Sarah Bassingthwaighte’s dissertation from 2000, which cites over 620 pieces for flute and electronics (including live and fixed-electronics).3
There are a number of possible factors contributing to the small repertoire. First, the rich history of the instrument has caused it to be viewed as a historic — rather than contemporary — instrument by horn players and composers. This can be seen in the repertoire taught in universities, where the focus is mainly on the works of German 19th- and early 20th- century composers, with the possibility a few contemporary works from the solo horn genre. The contemporary pieces most often include Otto Ketting’s Intrada (1977), originally written for trumpet but often performed on horn, Krol’s Laudatio (1966), Vincent Persichetti’s Parable
(1973), Malcolm Arnold’s Fantasy for Horn (1966), David Amram’s Blues and Variations for
Monk (1982), and Olivier Messiaen’s Appel Interstellaire from Des Canyons Aux Étoiles (1974).
Most of these are almost fifty years old and none of them use electronics. To explore what pieces
2 Erika Binsley Loke, A Survey of Works For Horn and Fixed Media from 1968 to 2016, DMA diss. (University of Maryland, 2016).
3 Sarah Bassignthwaigthe, Electro-Acoustic Music for Flute, DMA diss. (University of Washington, 2000). Bassingthwaigthe’s dissertation also includes fixed and live electronics. It is also an ongoing project on her website www.Subliminal.org/flute.
3
are being taught I compiled repertoire lists from Arizona State University, University of Iowa,
Trinity College (London) and The Association of The Royal Schools of Music and found seventy common pieces (see Appendix B). It is interesting to note that there are only two pieces with electronics, neither of which are readily available.4 The average year of composition for all the pieces is 1900. This suggests that the horn continues to be viewed as a traditional instrument.
Composers today do not commonly write for the horn in a contemporary solo plus EA setting and are more likely to write for the flute, saxophone, or percussion. One way to look at this comparison can be looking at participation at the SPLICE music festival which is dedicated to performance, creation, and development of music for performers and electronics. From 2015 to
2019 they had 12 saxophone participants, 10 flute, 9 percussion, and only 2 horn. This lack of exposure and participation from the horn community must certainly have an effect on which instrument composers choose to write for. The flute, saxophone, and percussion communities have more EA works because there are more performers commissioning them, more composers writing them, and more students studying and performing them. The contemporary music scene regards these instruments as contemporary instruments, with many possibilities for new performances.
A second explanation could be attributed to the mechanics of the instrument. Until the early
19th century the horn was without valves. These “natural horns” were only able to play pitches in one harmonic series because performers were not able to change the length of tube (although they could make some pitch modifications, albeit with timbral ramifications, with the right
4 Thea Musgrave’s Golden Echo has electronics in old mediums including an LP for practice and reel-to-reel tape for performance. Randall Faust’s Horn Call does not have a live patch.
4
hand). The music written during this time was tonally limited, staying in one key with the occasional shift to the relative minor. The introduction of valves, in the early decades of the 19th century eventually gave players a fully chromatic instrument without having to change timbre by using right-hand technique in the bell.5 Instead, the valves could change the length of tube to produce any pitch. Even with this change, players still often perform the works originally written for natural horn which leads to a repertoire today that is very tonal, often in the keys of F, E, E♭, and D major or the relative minor.6 The mechanical history of the instrument has led to composers writing for the horn in a certain style and has caused it to be mostly viewed as a purely tonal instrument, even though it is perfectly capable of performing non-tonal or microtonal music.
Of course, there are exceptions to these points. For instance, a number of composers have taken advantage of the horn’s harmonic series restrictions with unique compositional techniques.
Györgi Ligeti, William Shannon, and Thea Musgrave have all written for the horn by specifying the fingering and thus the partial of each note played in order to achieve a microtonal effect.
Within the harmonic series, a number of the partials are out of tune with our equal temperament tuning system. For instance, the 7th partial is flat and the 11th partial is sharp. If the composer wanted the horn to play a written B♭4 the performer would likely play it with the first valve on the B♭ horn, producing an in-tune B♭. If the desired effect was a B �4, the horn player could
5 Anthony Baines, Brass Instruments Their History and Development (New York Dover Publications Inc., 1976. provides an excellent survey of the invention and adoption of valve systems on pages 206-216; especially of the significant inventions of Stoelzel (1817), Bluhmel (1818), Uhlmann (1820), Wieprecht (1828), Perinet (1839).
6 These keys are known as the natural horn’s soloist keys.
5
play it with no depressed valves on the F horn producing a flat B♭, because it would be playing the 7th partial.
A number of composers have taken this concept a step further and have written for the natural horn in pieces such as Hermann Baumann’s composition Elegia. This solo horn composition is written in a very modern tonality and takes advantage of the range of colors that can be manipulated with the right hand. It is a great example of a modern work for an old instrument. For his project Supernatural, which will be discussed later in this document, Bruce
Bonnell commissioned two pieces for natural horn with live-EA.
Third, the horn’s exceptional flexibility has given it a place in a very large amount of repertoire, apart from contemporary music. A professional horn player can make a life in symphonic playing (including opera and ballet), wind band, chamber music (brass or woodwind quintets, as well as the ever-growing demand for horn quartet), and even solo playing, all without performing more than one or two contemporary pieces in a given season. This cultivates a culture of aesthetically conservative horn players. Compare this to a saxophone player who has fewer standard classical performance opportunities and a much younger instrument. This has given space for more contemporary works to be composed, including works with electronics.
There are instruments which have a similar amount of work, like the flute who can perform in a wind band, orchestra, woodwind quintet, mixed chamber or in a solo capacity, but has a much larger contemporary repertoire.
Finally, a horn player needs to master the basic technique of the instrument and the standard repertoire before attempting extended techniques. Some of these techniques will compromise the player’s ability to play standard repertoire. For instance, if a horn player is constantly trying to
6
produce multi-phonics, it can lead to them over-manipulating their throat, which can affect their breath function and eventually compromise their standard tone production. Because of this, a student isn’t usually ready for challenging pieces with extended techniques until they are an advanced undergraduate or graduate student. This is true for other instruments as well, but not to the same extent. A saxophone player will be able to start working on extended techniques earlier than a horn player, simply due to the fact that the saxophone has easier mechanics to produce a basic sound.
In order for a genre to thrive pieces must be commissioned, premiered, and made available for subsequent performances. I believe that a piece is not solidified into the standard repertoire until it receives multiple performances after the premiere. This document compiles a survey of pieces currently in the live electronics repertoire, and provides a performance and pedagogical analysis guide for players wanting to explore this genre for the first time. This document is a resource to horn players, encouraging them to consider performing and teaching works from this genre. It advocates for more performances of the existing repertoire.
The methodology includes exploration of scholarship on electroacoustic performance, as well as the horn and multimedia. Then explores the performers who are commissioning, as well as the composers that they are collaborating with, by conducting new interviews. It then investigates the performance and reception history of these works to provide a current state of the repertoire.
It contains a database including known pieces in the genre, with details for the performer considering programing the pieces. Finally, it includes a pedagogical analysis of a these works to demonstrate their viability in curricula for advanced undergraduates and graduate students.
Chapter II includes information about composer and performers that I have researched for 7 this document. It also provides background information for the pieces studied, as well as insight into the collaborative process. Chapter III surveys the repertoire and provide performance guides for the pieces. For the horn player looking to perform their first work with live electronics, this chapter helps you select a piece that would be appropriate for you. Chapter IV contains considerations for composers exploring aspects of these pieces that worked well and pitfalls to avoid.
The Compositional Challenges of Live Electronics
There is an important distinction to be made in defining the types of electronics used in electroacoustic compositions. The first and oldest type of electronics sometimes incorporated into musical performance is called fixed media. In this style of EA, the electronics are a fixed, unchanging file (Figure 1). Both the horn and the computer are producing sound that is sent to the audience, but there is no interactivity between the two. (Another name for this is tape music, which derives from a time when the electronically-generated component was recorded onto and then played back via magnetic tape.) The second type is live electronics, which has real-time computer processing and interactivity between the performer and the electronics. There are three categories of sound occurring in performance the horn sound, the horn sound processed by the computer, and the computer’s fixed elements.
These diagrams demonstrate the technological side of the composition process and do not take into account the audience’s perceived interactivity. For instance Karlheinz Stockhausen’s
Nebadon, which is the 17th hour of his work Klang, is a fixed electronics work with horn that utilizes 8 microphones with 8 speakers surrounding the audience. The electronics part is fixed, so
8
it does not interact with the horn part, but from the audience’s perspective it can sound as though it is a live electronics work.
Figure 1 Fixed Electronics and Live Electronics Flow Chart
Within electroacoustic music, especially the horn repertoire, there are far more fixed media pieces than live electronics. There are several reasons for this. The first is that live electronics takes more effort for everyone. It is more work for the composer, in terms of both a conceptual
9
sense and with programming. On a conceptual level, there are many more factors to consider for what the composer wants with the piece. In terms of the technical side, there is a much steeper learning curve with the programming languages. For a composer new to EA music, it would be an easier process for them to use a digital audio workstation, like Logic, to produce a fixed media portion of a piece, but it would take far more time to learn the complex programs in order to implement live elements. Live-EA patches also need maintenance through software updates, whereas a fixed media component will survive longer. For example, Thea Musgrave’s The
Golden Echo (1986) is only available as a practice LP and a reel-to-reel performance tape, but those mediums can be converted to digital medium. Pieces like Randall Faust’s Horn Call, on the other hand, are much more difficult to recreate as a live patch because of the complexity of the programming.7 The piece requires several different types of processing such as reverb, delay and ring modulators, which requires more complex programming for a patch.
For the performer, the technological demands are much more significant. For a fixed media piece, the bare minimum a performer needs is a way to play the pre-recorded component (like a laptop or even a smart phone) and a way to amplify it. For a live electronics piece, on the other hand, the performer needs a microphone, audio interface, headphones (or a monitor), a mixer, and a computer. Given the greater complexity, there is also a much higher chance of something going wrong with the live electronics.
So what are some of the benefits, and why go through this extra effort? For starters, a live electronics piece is unique to each performance. Like traditional repertoire, there are no two performances that are exactly alike. With a fixed piece, at least one element is totally constant.
7 The term “patch” is used to describe the file for live electronics programming.
10
While the horn player’s part varies, the tape is fixed, which takes a variable out of the equation.
Because of this, there are times when pieces for fixed electronics can feel rigid and predictable in the same way that musique concrete loses its sense of freshness after repeated listenings. Live electronics offers more flexibility in performance, resembling a performance with just acoustic instruments. Aesthetically speaking, it creates a more collaborative experience for the performer and the electronics.
I believe that there are also more sonic possibilities with live electronics. Being able to manipulate the horn player’s sound digitally is an interesting effect, and that can only truly occur with live electronics. The most simple example is a composer who wants to write a horn line that has an echo it can be done with both types of electronics. For fixed media, the composer would have to get a recording of a horn playing that line, then insert it into the tape. If the performer who is premiering the piece records the horn part, it can produce a seamless echo if it is played the same was as when it was recorded. But it can be difficult to match for subsequent performances with different players. For live electronics, however, the composer can program the computer to record, and reproduce the horn line in real-time, creating a more literal, authentic echo.
Live electronics can also offer more complex effects like ring modulation, which takes the horn’s signal adds another frequency which creates new frequencies as the sum and difference of the two. It’s an effect that sounds like the horn is suddenly producing multiple pitches creating a very unique timbre. The live electronics are able to convey all of the details of the horn’s playing.
The articulation, the start of the note, change in dynamics, the timbre of the horn player, the release of the note, et cetera. All of this is included in the electronics in a way that fixed media
11
would not be able to.
Overview of Softwares
It is important for performers to have a broad understanding of the softwares that these pieces use because they will need to be able to run the program to practice and perform. There is a very steep learning curve to understand the complex intricacies of programming in order to compose, but understanding the graphic user interfaces to perform is a much easier task.
The three main programs being used in electro-acoustic compositions are Max/MSP, Pure
Data, and SuperCollider. (There are others but these three cover the majority of pieces.) Max/
MSP created by Max Matthews and has become the industry standard for electroacoustic music.8
It is an object-based program with a simple graphic user interface that is meant to evoke old analog electronics equipment. For instance, in this figure we see a number of boxes called objects that are connected via lines known as patch cables. This patch will play a sound file and allows for adjustments to the output volume. This powerful program has virtually infinite ability that is limited only by a composer’s imagination and programing skill.
Pure Data, or otherwise referred to as PD, is a freeware programs similar to Max/MSP. It was created and is maintained by Miller Puckette. The benefit of PD is that it is freeware, which makes it very easy for anybody to experiment with and learn the programming language.
8 McGill University, Max/MSP History, Accessed 1/20/2021, https//www.music.mcgill.ca/~gary/ 306/week1/node2.html
12
Figure 2 Example of Max/MSP Patch
One huge benefit of both of these object-based programs is that it is a little easier to see how the patch (the name for a saved music file in these programs) functions compared to line-based code (Figure 2). Another benefit is that the composer can create a patch with a very easy to use interface. For instance, Kevin Ernste’s Nisi has a very several layers of complexity in the patch but the composer gives the performer a very simple interface.
SuperCollider, Originally released in 1996, is a freeware program that uses line-based programming and was developed by James McCartney. As a line-based program rather than an object-based program, it is less user-friendly and is difficult to fully understand the code or troubleshoot when things invariably go awry. Composers with experience in other programming languages like C++ would feel far more comfortable with this program than composers without this experience.
13
Figure 3 Example of SuperCollider patch
In addition to learning the performing aspect of these programs, if the performer is interested in learning the programming from a compositional standpoint, there are a number of fantastic resources out there including Designing Sound by Andy Farnell.9 This book walks the reader through the basics of sound design using PD. There are four sections in the book covering acoustic and synthesized sound theory, a step-by-step guide to learning the tools of the program, the technique of sound design, and several practical exercises to prepare the reader for most sound design problems
Pieces reviewed
For this document, I have selected eight pieces for horn and live electronics. These pieces are works that are accessible for advanced undergraduate or graduate horn players, and
9 Andy Farnell Designing Sound. (The MIT Press Cambridge London, 2010)
14 they are currently available for performance. These pieces are Silhouettes, Receding (2012) by
Jay Batzner (b.1974) for Bruce Bonnell; Ghost Circles (2013) by Jay Batzner for Bruce Bonnell;
Recombinant Serenade (2013) by Christopher Biggs (b.1979) for Lin Foulk Baird; Nisi (2012) by Kevin Ernste (1973) for Adam Unsworth; Horn Call (1976) by Randall Faust (1947); Gently
Weep (2009) by Thomas Hundemer (1954); Zylamander (2011) by Russell Pinkston (b. 1949) for
Luke Zyla; and Pulsar [Variant I] (2013) by Seth Shafer.
15
CHAPTER II. COMPOSERS AND PERFORMERS
The composer/performer relationship is incredibly important within all genres of music.
Pieces are usually composed with a specific performer in mind and often with some degree of collaboration. Because of this, it can be beneficial to know the backgrounds of the performers and composers to gain insight into the composition.
I conducted new interviews with the performers and composers of these works and found that they provide great insights not only to their pieces, but to common trends within this contemporary repertoire. Most of the performers discussed the difficulties and common pitfalls of performing with live electronics. The performers come from a wide range of levels of comfort with the technology, which shows that anyone can perform these works.
Surprisingly, there are a number of composers writing for the natural horn in this study.
Many of the composers cited how interested they were in the instrument because of the variety of colors that it can produce, and it was used very effectively in this genre.
In this chapter, I present each performer and composer of these pieces as well as provide context to the composition. The backgrounds of the performers and composers are presented and any inspiration for the piece is be discussed. I also discuss a number of key challenges to the horn and live electronics genre.
Jay Batzner Silhouettes, Receding and Ghost Circles
Jay Batzner is a composer based in Michigan and teaches composition, theory, and technology at Central Michigan University. He holds degrees from University of Kansas,
University of Louisville, and the University of Missouri-Kansas City. The majority of his output
16
is instrumental chamber music, but he has expanded to vocal music as well. His music has been performed at many new music festivals and instrumental performance societies.
Batzner has written 2 pieces for horn and live electronics Ghost Circles for natural horn and drone (2013) and Silhouettes, Receding for natural horn and live electronics (2012). He has written a couple of other pieces for horn including Sonatiny for horn (2010), H.B.M.D. for horn, trombone, and string orchestra (2004), and Danger Tree (2019) for horn and fixed electronics.
Bruce Bonnell is a chamber music specialist who has enjoyed a successful career as orchestral performer, soloist, clinician, and pedagogue on the horn and natural horn throughout
America and Southwest Asia. He was born and raised in Newfoundland, and he is currently the professor of horn at Central Michigan University. His most recent album, Chamber Music for
Horn, Violin, and Piano, was released in 2015.
Bonnell came to new music later in his career when working with contemporary composers like David Gillingham, who was a fellow colleague at CMU. Gillingham wrote new pieces for him in a more traditional language. His first experience with live electroacoustic music was the
Supernatural project. Although he had worked with fixed media compositions, like Mark
Schultz’s Dragons in the Sky, these were his first experiences with live electronics.
Bonnell described some of the challenges with the genre “I think a lot of horn players would share this sentiment…one works so hard to get purity of sound and accuracy in our general practice that to embrace modern techniques of tone manipulation takes one out of the comfort zone entirely.”10 This quote demonstrates the difficulties for a contemporary horn player: it takes years of practice to play it at a high level in a traditional setting. Once that is mastered, many of
10 Bruce Bonnell, email correspondence with the author, 6 January 2020.
17
the extended techniques called for not only take a lot of work to produce, but they often interfere with the player’s ability to produce the traditional tone that they worked so hard to cultivate.
There are two examples. The horn player is capable of producing 2 or more pitches at the same time by playing a pitch and singing a pitch simultaneously. If done correctly the horn can produce full chords. The technique is incredibly difficult as the horn player has to hear both pitches, and be able to produce them both in tune. One of the struggles when first learning to play them is trying to adjust one of the pitches without affecting the other. The horn player often has to make adjustments to their throat, jaw, and tongue to produce the correct pitches, which can have an adverse effect on their playing when returning to traditional pieces.
The second example is from a chamber piece that I performed that was entirely stopped horn.
When playing stopped horn, there is more back pressure from the horn because the hand is closing off the bell. As a result the horn player has to match the pressure by over blowing the note, to achieve the buzzy aesthetic. If done for long enough, when they return to traditional playing they can work too hard and over-blow each of the notes.
Bonnell approached Batzner about writing a piece for him, and upon hearing the radio broadcast recording of Anthony Halstead playing the Weber Concertino on natural horn, he expressed interest in writing for that instrument. He quickly found that writing for natural horn was not limiting but instead offered the composer a unique palette of colors. Batzner views the natural horn not as having limitations, but as having a wide color palette that should be embraced, much like Mozart. This study of the instrument’s possibilities gave way to these excellent pieces, written so skillfully for the natural horn. The natural horn can be a challenging instrument to write for, because it requires a deep understanding of how the instrument functions.
18
When writing for a valved horn, the composer can write notes on the page that they hear in their head, and the performer will put down the right valve and produce the note. For a natural horn, however, the composer needs to consider what notes are possible given the length of pipe, and also consider the timbre of the notes produced outside of the harmonic series. When done well, this can create an incredible experience for the audience.
Christopher Biggs Recombinant Serenade
Christopher Biggs is a composer and multimedia artist based in Kalamazoo, MI. He is an
Associate Professor of Music Composition and Technology at Western Michigan University. He is the director of SPLICE institute, which is a weeklong intensive at WMU for composers and performers who are interested in electroacoustic performance. His first album. Decade Zero. was released on Ravello Records in 2017. He has written for horn in a chamber piece entitled
Incommensurable for clarinet, horn, and computer, as well.
Lin Foulk Baird is the Professor of Horn at Western Michigan University. She has performed in the Boston Brass, Monarch Brass, and at 5 International Horn Society
Symposiums. She has served as the principal horn of Oshkosh and Manitowoc Symphonies. She has been a champion of music written by female composers, including her first CD Four
Elements Works for Horn and Piano by Female Composers (2004). She has degrees from the
University of Missouri-Kansas City and the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
In addition to Recombinant Serenade Biggs and Foulk Baird have worked together in a chamber capacity including for Incommensurable for clarinet, horn, and computer, and Decade
Zero for brass quintet and computer.
19
One of the challenges that she has encountered in new music, especially with electronics, is that she has always loved the sound of pieces with horn and electronics but she is not very interested in learning all of the electronics. Because of this, all of her performances are reliant on the composers to set up and troubleshoot the technology. While this works well for performances, it also can be a problem logistically for practice beforehand. This set up makes it difficult for the horn player to easily practice the piece without a tech person there, and the problem is multiplied when something goes wrong and there is nobody there to troubleshoot. For the composer this brings to light the importance of making a user-friendly graphic user interface and for the performer, it is important to learn about the technology as much as possible.
Christopher Biggs’s Recombinant Serenade is an homage to Benjamin Britten’s Serenade for Tenor, Horn and Strings. The work is a series of variations based on the Prologue movement, which is written for the notes on the F harmonic series. The electronics for this work use recordings of Baird playing natural horn as the source material, and the live horn is also processed in real time.11
Biggs and Baird worked together closely during the compositional process, with Baird demonstrated a variety of techniques and they collaborated on how to make the piece comfortable to play. It was premiered at the International Horn Society Symposium in Memphis,
Tennessee in 2013. The theme of this symposium was Britten’s Serenade, so the piece was composed with that in mind.
11 Christopher Biggs, Recombinant Serenade, Accessed 2/6/2021, https// christopherbiggsmusic.com/recombinant-serenade
20
Kevin Ernste Nisi
Kevin Ernste is a composer, performer, and teacher of composition and electronic music at
Cornell University. He is the director for the Cornell Electroacoustic Music Center (CEMC) and is a founding member of the Cornell Avant-Garde Ensemble (CAGE). He received his MA and
PhD from the University of Rochester, Eastman School of Music.
Adam Unsworth is the Professor of Horn at the University of Michigan as well as the principal horn of the Ann Arbor Symphony Orchestra. He is dedicated to commissioning and performing new works, and has released 5 CDs Excerpt This!, Next Step, CLASSIC
STRUCTURES, Snapshots, and Chamber music of Stephen Rush, all focusing on jazz and contemporary music. He began playing new music as an undergraduate at Northwestern
University in the Contemporary Music Ensemble. He felt comfortable immediately and enjoyed the unique textures and instrumentation. He was also attracted to the technical challenges that it provided.12
Some challenges that Unsworth has encountered in contemporary works include extended techniques like the technical passages in the Ligeti’s Hamburg Concerto that include quarter tones. Quarter tones are a technique borrowed from microtonal music, which utilizes pitches between our traditional western music chromatic scale dividing the octave into 12 equal parts.
The distance between a half step, or semitone, is divided into 100 cents. Quarter tones require the player to produce a pitch half way between the half step, or 50 cents above or below a pitch. It is easier to produce these notes on non-fretted stringed instruments, like a violin or cello. The player simply presses their finger between the two pitches. But for horn, it is a more complicated
12 Adam Unsworth, email correspondence with the author, 12 January 2020.
21
technique. These alternate fingerings also bring another layer of difficulty to the player, since the odd numbered partials tend to be very slick and unstable to produce, making accuracy a real challenge. Horn players also spend their entire life on the horn working to play notes in tune, so often times a player will put down an alternate fingering for a microtonal note they unknowingly make the manipulations needed to play the note perfectly in tune.
Kajato is a piece Ernste wrote for trumpet and flugel horn and electronics that Unsworth heard and liked so much, that he transcribed the work and performed it on horn. He even including a recording of it on his album, Snapshots, a feat that is not too surprising given his background in jazz. Unsworth then contacted Ernste to create something new.
Ernste and Unsworth worked together closely through the creation of Nisi. Ernste prefers to get to know the performers that he composes pieces for to be able to write for their strengths and with their playing style. The two spent a couple of days in Ernste’s recording studio in Ithaca,
New York recording all kinds of sounds from the horn. As a result, most of the sounds heard in the fixed portion of the electronics come from the sound of Unsworth’s horn.
One of Ernste’s favorite parts of writing for the horn is the horn’s ability to use the bell adjustments to affect the timbre. The horn player can manipulate the sound with right hand technique and mutes, but also with the bell position and movement. This effect is seen in Nisi with movement on and off the microphone, as well as in the ending with the physical gestures.
In addition to Adam Unsworth’s premiere on April 25th, 2012 as part of a faculty recital at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, the piece has received an estimated 40 performances, making it the most performed work in this document. I believe it has received so many performances because of the heightened awareness of the piece. It follows the same promotional
22
process where the piece is performed, other hornists may here it and want to perform it.
Unsworth’s position in academia helps as well, because he can suggest the piece for his students.
Randall Faust Horn Call
Randall Faust is a legend in the horn community as a composer, hornist, author, and professor. He has been selected as an International Horn Society Honorary Member, and recently retired from Western Illinois University. He studied at Interlochen, Eastern Michigan University,
Minnesota State University Mankato, and the University of Iowa. He studied with Marvin Howe,
Micheal Hatfield, Arnold Jacobs, and Helen Kotas Hirsh. As a composer he has a very extensive repertoire with 95 compositions.
Faust became a pioneer in the horn and live electronics genre with his composition Horn
Call for Horn and Electronic Media which was written in 1976. The piece was composed at the
Electronic Music Studios of The University of Iowa, while Faust was completing his DMA. The piece received several performances before its publication in 1978.
The work serves as the earliest piece included in this project, and demonstrates one of the unfortunate truths of working with technology it always changes. The piece was originally written for analog devices, including two stereophonic tape recorders, a synthesizer system
(including preamp, sine wave oscillator, ring modulator, voltage controlled filter/resonator, a voltage controlled amplifier, an envelope follower, a lag processor, an output mixer, and a reverb unit), power amplifiers, and monitor speakers. This elaborate set up is complex and can be incredibly expensive, especially with how antiquated the technology is.
The work was performed by Andrew Pelletier with a MAX/MSP patch programmed by
23
Mark Bunce, but the patch has since been lost. Pelletier does have a recording available on his
CD of Faust’s music, Celebration The Horn Music of Randall Faust.
This is the first piece in this document that was written and performed by the same person, and this lack of divide between composer and performer is readily apparent in the work. The piece is written incredibly well for the horn, especially with all of the natural horn elements.
While this piece is not currently available for performance, it has been included for two reasons. Firstly, it is one of the first pieces in this genre of music. It is a masterful work that was written with such foresight and compositional craft. Secondly, I am including it in the hopes that someone with programming skill who is exploring this project may feel inspired to create a Max/
MSP patch to bring this piece back to life.
Thomas Hundemer Gently Weep
Thomas Hundemer is a composer and hornist based in Louisiana. He is the Principal horn of the Shreveport Symphony and is the Director of the Hurley Music Library and Lecturer in
Horn at Centenary College. He studied at the University of Southern Mississippi and University of Iowa. He has been performing new music since high school and has performed with groups such as the Cabrillo Festival of New Music Orchestra under Marin Alsop. Some of the challenges he mentioned included having to practice the intricate rhythms and technical demands of new music and sometimes performing music that was not well written for the horn.
Kristine Coreil is the Professor of Horn and Theory at Northwestern State University in
Louisiana. She performs in the Shreveport Symphony Orchestra and is a frequent recitalist across the United States. She holds a Doctorate from the University of Wisconsin and a Master’s
24
degree from Northwestern University.13 Coriel premiered Gently Weep in 2004 and has given it several subsequent performances, all on natural horn. Hundemer cites a challenge in writing for horn is dealing with the large repertoire that he is familiar with, as a horn player, “it can be quite daunting.” 14
The piece has a very simple set up and can be a great piece for a first electroacoustic performance. The only electronic part is a multi-tap delay line. Because of this, there is a lot of flexibility in putting the piece together. There are several pieces of software that are able to create this effect including Ableton live and logic, or hardware can be used like Yahama’s
DDS-20M Digital Delay.
Russell Pinkston Zylamander
Russell Pinkston is a composer, teacher, and sound designer based in Austin, Texas. He has written works for choral, chamber, symphonic winds, as well as electronic music for modern dance. He is a Professor of Composition at University of Texas at Austin and directs the electronic music studios. He is a past president of The Society for Electro-Acoustic Music in the
United States (SEAMUS).
Luke Zyla is a retired band director and second horn of the West Virginia Symphony
Orchestra. He began playing new music as a student at West Virginia University. He became familiar with the composer of Zylamander, Russell Pinkston, when he heard a performance of his piece Gerrymander for Clarinet and Electronics at a concert presented by the Pittsburgh New
Music Ensemble. He later heard Pinkston’s piece Lizamander for flute and electronics,
13 Kristine Coreil, Linkedin Profile, accessed 2/6/2020, https//www.linkedin.com/in/kristine- coreil-7507839.
14 Thomas Hundemer, email correspondence with the author, 20 May 2020.
25
performed by Lindsey Goodman. He commissioned Zylamander to play at a recital celebrating his retirement from public school teaching in 2011. The project was partially funded from the
Meir Rimon Commissioning Fund of the International Horn Society.
Zyla cites what he defines as the expected challenges with a piece like this, especially with technical challenges of facility and range. There was also a financial investment needed for the technology, and a time investment needed to learn how it works. Zyla and Russell collaborated on the composition of the piece by Zyla sending recordings of horn sounds to become source material for the piece. There were several revisions made to the piece including a section in the middle of the work where there is a longer electronics solo which gives the performer time to empty water from their horn.
Seth Shafer Pulsar [Variant I]
Seth Shafer is a composer and researcher whose work focuses on real-time notation, interactive music, and algorithmic art. His compositions have been performed internationally
(London, South Korea, Athens, Hamburg, Shanghai, Kraków, Spoleto, and Rio de Janeiro) and across the USA (New York, Los Angeles, Boston, Dallas). His sound installations have been shown at Kaneko (Omaha), the Perot Museum of Nature and Science (Dallas), and the Long
Beach Museum of Art (CA). Seth is Assistant Professor of Music Technology at the University of Nebraska at Omaha and holds degrees from the University of North Texas and California State
University, Long Beach.
Pulsar [Variant I] was premiered by Jessica Young, who was a fellow student when Shafer was working on his Master’s degree at the University of North Texas. The piece has only
26
received a few other performances since. Shafer has also written for the horn in a number of large ensemble works featuring four horns. He also wrote a chamber work Silbertöne for violin, horn, and laptop quartet.
Shafer cites that the biggest challenge in writing for horn and electronics is an audio engineering problem where do you place a microphone? Because the bell of the horn faces away from the audience, the sound of the horn is best when it bounces off a wall or two before reaching the audience’s ears. However, it is very common in electro-acoustic music to place the microphone very close to the instrument, to get a pure sound and not hear any of the amplified electronics. His suggestion has been to use a large diaphragm cardioid one to two feet behind the bell, and slightly off access, so that the horn bell is not pointed directly into the microphone. His favorite part of writing for horn is using the wide pallet of colors that the horn can produce and only widening the pallet with the electronics.
This piece is one of the few to provide a program note “A pulsar is a specific type of neutron star that emits a periodic beam of electromagnetic radiation. The regular pulsation can be likened to a metronome or a delay unit in that the material is in a fixed state of repetition. This piece for solo horn uses echo and repetition only as a point of departure to other live processing realms like temporal freezing and polyphonic pitch shifting.”15
Throughout the piece the only source material is what is happening live, meaning there is no fixed media that is prerecorded. This fact makes this piece not only a great work, but an impressive programming feat.
15 Seth Shafer. Personal Website, accessed 2/1/2020, http://backup.sethshafer.com/ pulsar_variant_1.html
27
CHAPTER III . A SURVEY AND PERFORMANCE GUIDE OF THE REPERTOIRE
Method of Analysis
In my analysis of these works I wanted to develop a system that would allow me to highlight characteristics of the pieces and compare them to pieces in the standard repertoire, backed with specific data. I chose to look at overall range, average pitch, average pitch weighted by duration, average interval. This data will help a performer or a teacher decide which piece will have the appropriate difficulty. The majority of these factors are pitch centric, which I found to be the most important aspect of assessing the difficulty of these works.
Average Pitch
The method that I used is very intuitive. I assigned every chromatic pitch a numerical value beginning with C1 as 0. With each ascending chromatic step, the number classification increases by 1 and ends with a C6 represented by 48, it can obviously go higher if needed. This data set is used to analyze overall range as well as the average pitch for the piece.
For instance, the Trio from Johann Sebastian Bach’s first Brandenburg concerto is a great example of a piece that has a very high average pitch. The average pitch for this entire passage is an E5. A piece with a more moderate average pitch would be the horn solo from the second movement of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky’s Fifth symphony with an average pitch is a B4. For a lower extreme, Gustav Mahler’s 1st symphony, 3rd movement has a low passage in the second and fourth horns at rehearsal 13. The average pitch throughout the passage is a D♭3.
Range is often given when describing a piece, especially in academic circles, because it is an
28 easy way to see if a piece would be appropriate for a student. For instance, high range typically takes time for a student to master so assigning them a piece with a high C in it might not be best.
However, using range doesn’t offer much information in terms of the endurance needed to play the piece. Average pitch helps give a brief idea of where the majority of the piece is played throughout the range.
Average Pitch Weighted for Duration
I also wanted to have the data account for the duration of the pitches. For example with a
C6 and a C4 the average pitch would be a C5. But if the C6 is a whole note while the C4 is a quarter note, then the average pitch weighted by duration would be a G5.
To go one step beyond the average pitch, I thought that average pitch with a duration component would be helpful. When considering a high note, the longer the note, the more taxing it is for the player. This data over an entire piece is usually has a very small range, but it gives an idea of whether the notes above or below the average pitch have longer note values.
Average Interval
Average interval looks at the average distance between each pitch throughout the piece. I also divided it into average ascending interval and average descending interval by removing all repeated pitches and analyzed just the positive and negative intervals. The purpose here is to analyze how many large leaps occur during a piece. Johann Sebastian Bach’s Brandenburg
Concerto No. 1 in F Major BWV 1046, IV Movement trio 1st horn has a very low average interval averaging a minor third. On the other extreme, Ludwig Van Beethoven’s Symphony No. 6, mvt. 5
29
has many large leaps with an average interval of a minor 6th.
In addition to these technical modes of analyzing, I will be exploring the pieces from a performance and pedagogical angle. Focusing on how to help the student/teacher understand and perform these works.
Order of compositions
For the performer who is exploring this genre for the first time and is unsure of where to start, I have organized the pieces in order of relative difficulty. The pieces are categorized into 3 difficulties undergraduate performance major, graduate performance major, and virtuoso. The first four pieces are suitable for the undergraduate performance major including Ghost Circles,
Recombinant Serenade, Pulsar [Variant I], and Nisi. The next three pieces are suitable for the graduate performance major including Gently Weep, Silhouettes, Receding, and Zylamander.
Horn Call is the final piece and the only piece in the virtuoso category. These difficulty levels are meant as a starting point and not definitive or all encompassing. The player should consult the tables for every piece and take note of the length of the piece, the overall range and the interval information to better understand the difficulty of the piece before purchasing the score.
30
Batzner, Jay Ghost Circles
Table 1 Jay Batzner Ghost Circles
Title Ghost Circles Composer Jay Batzner Publisher Unsafe Bull Music Date 2013 Electronics Program Max/MSP Technical Requirement microphone, interface, computer, stereo output Duration 7 Minutes Difficulty Level 3 Undergraduate performance major Extended Techniques None Range G3-Bb5 (notated) F3-Ab5 (played) Average Pitch 35.49, B4 Average Pitch Weighted for Duration 35.12, B4 Difference AP and APWD -0.37
Average Interval 2.68 minor 3rd Average Interval non 0 3.11 minor 3rd Average Ascending 3.1 minor 3rd Average Descending -3.11 minor 3rd
Overview
The structure of this piece features an ABA’B’C form. The entire piece features on constantly adapting melody. The first appearance of the melody is presented in measure 6 (Music
Example 1), and is repeated throughout the work.
31
Music Example 1 Jay Batzner, Ghost Circles mm 6 (Treble Clef)
It evolves organically into two different iterations, a melodic line and a fanfare. The A section starts with a drawn out presentation of the melody, and features both the melodic and fanfare melodies. In measure 34, the B section begins with a shift in material in the same style but with different pitch and intervalic material. An F#4 appears for the first time, providing a different color in addition to a different pitch. For the first time in the piece we see a descending octave as a motive, which appears four times. The A’ section returns with the same figure from measure 6 followed by a fanfare of the melody. In measure 72, a B’ section begins with a quick reiteration of the melody featuring the F#4. There are 4 measures of transition material providing a sort of V-I in measures 79-82 bringing the piece to the closing section. This section features some new material from measures 83-95, resembling earlier material. The piece closes with a reiteration of the original melody in measure 95, a quick fanfare in measure 100, before ending the piece an an A4.
Horn Part
As with all pieces written for natural horn the difficulty will be producing the right pitches and consistent right hand technique.16 This is a great piece to start with for a player who has little
16 See natural horn resources in Appendix C
32
natural horn experience because the part is written well and lays on the horn quite easily. There are only a couple of tricky notes to produce a F#4 and an A5 above the staff. The piece focuses around several strong, open partials like B♭4 and C5. The piece has a comfortable range throughout the work (played pitch F3-A♭5), and the only technical challenge is a clean double tongue for the 32nd notes.
Electronics
The electronics for this piece are written to mimic the natural horn on a very elemental level with a focus on half steps. Throughout the first section of this piece the electronics begin with a Bb drone, and descend by a half step with a pitch bend 4 times (then by a whole step once). This half step descent is one of the prominent features of the natural horn, where the horn player uses right hand technique to lower a pitch by one half step. In fact, the piece begins with this very figure, where the horn plays an open Bb and then covers to play an A.
In measure 45 the drone drops by a half step, but for the first time in the piece it arrives at the note without a pitch bend. This is striking to the listener because it is the first sudden shift in the stasis of the drone. The drone continues to descend in this manner until reaching a low Bb in measure 63, which feels like an arrival at tonic. The drone’s movement is (Bb, A, Ab, G, F, Eb,
Db, C, Bb).
Measure 88 begins the reverb of the horn part, which is the first instance of live electronic processing. It can be surprising to a listener who is not expecting it.
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations
There is very little interactivity between the two parts. The melodic lines coincide with the
33
change in drone pitch, and the part features a delay line in measure 88.
-Articulation exercises
Clean and clear double tongue during the fanfare sections can be tricky due to the close proximity of the partials. For instance, double tonguing on a D5 and E5 can present a challenge especially to a horn player who doesn’t have as much experience with natural horn.
-Upper register
Playing passages open with valves then moving to the natural horn technique can help solidify pitches in the upper register. It helps the player hear the pitches accurately, and feel where the notes will slot.
-Bb4
The player needs to get comfortable with playing a written Bb4 on the open horn. Of all of the open pitches on the horn, I find this one to feel the most foreign because it is the 7th partial.
Practicing starting on that pitch will help the beginning of the piece.
34 Biggs, Christopher Recombinant Serenade
Table 2 Christopher Biggs, Recombinant Serenade
Title Recombinant Serenade Composer Christopher Biggs Publisher Self-Published Date 2013 Electronics Program Max/MSP Technical Requirement microphone, interface, computer, stereo output Duration 7 minutes Difficulty Level 3 Undergraduate Performance Major Extended Techniques Growl Range B2-B5 Average Pitch 26, D3 Average Pitch Weighted for Duration 27.22 Difference AP and APWD +1.16 Average Interval 4.91, Perfect 4th Average Interval non 0 5.96, Tritone Average Ascending 5.99, Tritone Average Descending -5.93, Tritone
Overview
The piece can be broken down into two large sections. The first section features short fragments of Britten’s Prologue horn call, in an altered key and rhythms. The second large section is much more rhythmically active, beginning at measure 58, or rehearsal D.
It begins simply both in terms of rhythm and pitch material. Harmonically the piece begins with an Ebadd2 chord (concert pitch) firmly establishing a tonic center, but with a different color than a major triad. The piece travels away from this pitch center with cluster chords like at rehearsal B, with an Am7,b9,13. The first horn call with an ascending perfect fifth is the same as
Britten’s opening, but a ninth lower. The second iteration adds a couple of notes, and the third
35
ends on an A providing a beautiful major 7th on top of the chord. This piece expands from the harmonic series that is used in the Britten to some very colorful chord extensions in the harmonies.
At rehearsal B, there is a distinct tonal shift both in the horn part and the electronics. The horn plays an Ab, which is the first time we have heard anything outside of Bb major, and it signals a shift to Ab major. The source material shifts to measure 4 from the serenade
Notice the use of the intervalic structure of an ascending fourth followed by a descending figure. Biggs has changed the range, and as a result the tessitura of the figure, but is also manipulating the line with complex rhythmic changes. These rhythms become more complex as the piece continues.
The third small section of the piece starts with a do-do-sol, in the key of Db (music example 3), mimicking the call from the first measure again of the Prologue of the Serenade
(music example 2). Instead of playing it in a high tessitura, it’s played in the low range.
Music Example 2 Benjamin Britten Serenade mm. 4
36
Music Example 3 Christopher Biggs Recombinant Serenade mm. 33-34
The second section of the piece, starting at rehearsal D, features increasingly complex rhythms in the horn part. The rhythms are made easier by the fact that the electronics are often resting during these rhythmic outbursts. There is a ring modulator17 effect beginning at measure
47, which provides additional notes to the horn’s sound in real time. In Lin Foulk Baird’s recording she plays the notated G2 in 50 and 51 an octave higher at a G 3.
The second portion of the piece begins at rehearsal D with extensive development of rhythmic material. The heavy syncopation stays in a sixteenth note subdivision and usually starts with a solid anchor on the beat and then blurs the pulse later in the line.
At rehearsal E the electronics contain a cacophonous mass of sound, with both horn and synthesized sound. The horn and the electronics play phrases back and forth between the horn line and a mass of sound. At measure 104 the horn plays a triplet figure that repeats 3 times building tension to the climax of the piece at rehearsal F. Once again, imitating measure 1 of
Britten’s Serenade, but a major third higher. The high B melts into another electronic interlude, before a calming coda that ends the piece.
17 A ring modulator multiplies two frequencies to create 2 new frequencies which are the sum and difference of the input frequency.
37
Horn Part
In relation to the rest of the works in this document, this piece is by far the lowest in terms of tessitura. The average pitch (26.06) is a D3, a full tritone lower than the next lowest average pitch. The horn part is also one of the most disjunct, which follows the old cor alto and basso horn traditions of the pre-valve era of horn playing. The cor alto parts require high range and endurance, while playing melodies with smaller intervals. The cor basso, on the other hand, would be required to play lower and far more flexible with larger intervals. This piece falls into the cor basso tradition, with a low tessitura and large leaps.
The biggest challenge in performing this piece is the rhythmic complexity. It forces the player to be very comfortable playing syncopated rhythms, highlighting any sixteenth note division in the beat.
Some of the lower lines, like in measure 104, were taken up the octave in Lin Foulk
Baird’s recording of the work. The lines as written are very low and difficult to play cleanly and quietly in that register. Some of the difficult aspects of playing in the pedal register are starting the note with a clean articulation and it is even more difficult if the note is to be played softly.
During the recording process, the passage was recorded as written and an octave higher and ultimately the composer liked how the higher octave sounded.
Electronics
The electronics have the most classic “electroacoustic sound” of the pieces in this document. The piece has a number of synthesized sounds, and makes frequent use of harmonic sweeps emphasizing different harmonic material from a given sound. It gives a very synthesized
38 feel, especially with all of the sound mass sections. The electronics provide a perfect representation of the character of electroacoustic music.
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations
-Drum Beats
For practicing the rhythmic sections I would recommend playing along with a drum beat, rather than a metronome. If you have an Apple product, Garage Band is an application that comes standard. Within that program, it is very easy to select a drum loop, or series of loops (for variety) and set them to the appropriate BPM. I find that the drum beat, more than a regular metronome, encourages the player to feel the groove and not to play it so mechanically.
-Vocalize Rhythms
As elementary as it may sound, I found that snapping with the beat and vocalizing the rhythms really helped solidify the complex rhythms. Do not just aim for rhythmic clarity, also strive for a groove and a solid feel throughout the passages.
-Low Range Flexibility
Throughout this piece there are several passages that require quick and nimble playing in the bass clef. I would highly recommend that the player practice flexibility slurs in the lower register, slurring between the 2-4th partials on each horn, for instance. Adding articulation in, would be helpful as well.
39
-Ascending scales
There are a couple of passages that require the horn player to begin in the pedal register and quickly ascend, like music example 4. In addition to practicing this particular line, also work on scales and arpeggios starting in this register into the high register.
Music Example 4 Christopher Biggs Recombinant Serenade mm. 56-57
40 Shafer, Seth Pulsar [Variant 1]
Table 3 Seth Shafer Pulsar [Variant I]
Title Pulsar [Variant I] Composer Seth Shafer Publisher Self-published Date 2013 Electronics Program Max/MSP Technical Requirement microphone, interface, computer, stereo output Duration 5 minutes Difficulty Level 3 Undergraduate performance major Extended Techniques none Range G2-G5 Average Pitch 31.58, Ab4 Average Pitch Weighted for Duration 32.18,A♭4
Difference AP and APWD +.6 Average Interval 3.95, Major 3rd Average Interval non 0 5, Perfect 4th Average Ascending 4.4, Major 3rd Average Descending -5.6, Tritone
Overview
The structure of this piece is through composed, although there are certainly ideas that repeat, but the piece evolves without a true return to material. In terms of compositional technique, dramatic effect, and programming, this is one of the most finely crafted pieces reviewed in this document. The listener feels like they are listening to something that takes them somewhere with consistently new ideas.
The piece begins with a fanfare from the horn that is echoed in the electronics. This triplet figure returns throughout the piece (music example 5).
41
Music Example 5 Seth Shafer Pulsar [Variant 1] mm.6-9
The next distinct section occurs at rehearsal D or measure 81. The horn has a long drawn out melody, that Shafer harmonizes with the electronics. The effect creates a sudden moment that sounds like a full horn choir.
Music Example 6 Seth Shafer Pulsar [Variant 1] mm. 83-86
The climax of the piece comes in measure 97 with the horn playing a fortissimo pedal G
42
and the electronics repeating an ascending sweeping figure, creating a feeling of chaos (music example 7).
Music Example 7 Seth Shafer Pulsar [Variant 1] mm. 97-98
The piece then winds down with a return of some large intervals and a brief triplet fanfare while the electronics play a consistent eighth note pulse quickly switching octaves.
Horn Part
Shafer has written a very effective and playable horn part. The opening fanfares are very disjunct but in a comfortable range. The whole piece doesn’t go above a G5 and it stays in the midrange of the horn. One part of that piece that can be particularly challenging is the leap from
G to the opening fanfare. This 2 octave shift is helped with a short rest, but it can take some practice to be able to shift from the pedal note, to accurately playing in the horns upper register.
43
Electronics
This piece uses Max/MSP, and uses it in a very unique way to achieve synchronization between the performer and electronics. There are a number of pieces, particularly fixed media, that use some sort of visual metronome, usually a flash cue on the computer screen with a measure number accompanying. Shafer has achieved this without requiring the performer to split their attention between the music and the visual metronome.
The interface for Pulsar [Variant 1] contains elements similar to other pieces explored in this document. What is unique, however, is the use of 4 red dots on the top of the screen, above the score, which dictate the rhythmic pulse. The horn part scrolls along through the piece underneath these visual cues, with the score advancing at the end of every bar. I would recommend, however, that the performer practices with the score to ensure that they are familiar with the entire piece, not just the horn part.
The effects throughout the piece include simple delays, multi-tap rhythmic delays, polyphonic pitch shifting, frozen sounds, and spectral/timbral effects.
This piece has some of the most interesting electronics in this project. There are so many different ideas and effects being used that it always keeps the listener guessing. The first interesting effect mentioned in the programs notes is in measure 17 there is a “temporal freezing” effect that takes the horns sound and extends it, but in a way different than reverb. It creates this constant granulated sound.
Another interesting effect is at rehearsal A he uses polyphonic pitch shifting to create a melody line out of just one note, a G above the staff for the horn player.
44
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations
The interactivity between the two parts has a very playful back and forth through much of the piece. In the opening after the first fanfare, there is a synthesized descending scale that sounds like it is a harmonic sweep. The triplet fanfare in measure 6 is echoed by the electronics but with different pitch content.
-Horn choir section effect
At rehearsal D, the horn’s sound is manipulated to create full chords. This is a powerful effect for the audience, but it can be rather jarring at first for the horn player. When playing these sections, begin by focusing only on your sound. The computer will take care of the other voices, but the horn sound has to be focused and centered, and not impacted by the extra sounds.
-Angular lines
Throughout the piece, Shafer uses several passages with larger intervals, like the opening major 6th. While working on the piece it would be helpful to continue to work on interval exercises, like the expanding interval studies in J.B. Arban’s Conservatory Method for the
Cornet, to gain facility with wider intervals.
-Midrange articulation
In measure 6 the horn has articulated triplet figure at piano, it can be difficult to add clarity in this register. Playing articulated scales through the midrange and at a piano dynamic will help prepare a player for this passage.
45
-Rhythmic Subdivision
One of the most interesting aspects of this piece is the shift between triplet, sixteenth, and quintuplet subdivisions. If this is particularly challenging to the player I would encourage using a drum machine or beat from a program like Garage Band or Logic, and clapping different subdivisions. The difficulty is usually in switching between them, so challenge yourself to go from a measure of triplets, to a measure of sixteenth notes, to a measure of quintuplets.
46 Ernste, Kevin Nisi
Table 4 Kevin Ersnte Nisi
Title Nisi Composer Kevin Ernste Publisher Self-Published Date 2012 Electronics Program Pure Data Technical Requirement microphone, interface, computer, stereo output, footpedal Duration 13 minutes Difficulty Level 3 Undergraduate Performance Major Extended Techniques Half-Valve Portamento Range E3-F♯5 Average Pitch 32.39, A♭4 Average Pitch Weighted for Duration 33.26, A4 Difference AP and APWD +0.87 Average Interval 7.2, Perfect 5th Average Interval non 0 8.79, Major 6th Average Ascending 8.23, minor 6th Average Descending -9.05, Major 6th
Overview
The piece follows a modified rondo form, beginning with a loud and aggressive opening fanfare section. The section is not only sonically active to the listener, with bursts of sound and the timbral shifts of going from stop to open, but it’s visually interesting as well. The player is asked to move their bell off and on to the microphone, creating a sort of dance. Beginning in measure 10, there is a slower more disjunct melodic section. The electronics calm and slowly resolve to a drone pitch and the horn plays an eerily beautiful almost haunting melody. In measure 24 there is a quick return to the aggressive fanfare before a return to the slow disjunct
47
section, but this time with a short horn call of sorts in measure 36.
In measure 49, the horn plays a section with an interesting extended technique, marked
“half-valve / lipbend ‘moaning.’” Over a cluster chord in the electronics, the horn plays these moaning sounds that are ambiguous in pitch. This leads to another horn call mostly with ascending major 7ths. This leads to the climax of the piece in measure 84. After the electronics calm, the horn returns with the slower disjunct section to complete the piece.
Horn part
The horn part has a few important elements of difficulty as well as a couple of extended techniques. There are several instances that demand flexibility with many large leaps. These are to be played in a soft, smooth, and connected style (music example 8).
Music Example 8 Kevin Ernste Nisi mm. 11-13
There are also many uses of hand glissandi as an effect (music example 9).
48
Music Example 9 Kevin Ernste Nisi mm. 3-5
Ernste calls for a half-valve / lipbend “moaning” effect (example 10) that is similar to
Oliver Messiaen’s Appel Interstellaire from Des Canyons Aux Êtoiles, which features a coyote howl effect. I have found this extended technique to be easier on horns with wider partials, for instance my Paxman 25L could produce these sounds between the partials very easily. While my
Alexander 103, which has much more well-defined partials, makes it far more difficult.
Music Example 10 Kevin Ernste Nisi mm. 48
Lastly, the most difficult aspect of this piece is at the 13th cue where the horn is asked to lip- bend/half-valve glissandi from a c#-g’’ over the course of 40 seconds (music example 10). I found this technique to be very difficult to keep the pitch consistently rising through the range of
49
the horn. However, in performance I have found that the effect is largely lost to the audience.
During the effect there is a building chorus of loud and aggressive brass in the background. Even if this effect is played well it is covered up by the electronics.
Music Example 11 Kevin Ernste Nisi mm. 83
Electronics
Figure 4 Kevin Ernste Nisi Graphic User Interface
50
Nisi was the first EA piece that I performed, and I would highly recommend it to a beginner in the genre especially because of its easy-to-use interface.
On the left side there are 20 small boxes labeled #_ player, which refers to the fixed elements of the work. Throughout the work a number of events are triggered at specific points in the composition, these events are varying lengths and can be tracked through the composition here.
The center has a list from 1-20 with boxes underneath and a section that says jump_to, these are both for rehearsal purposes. Either clicking the box under the number, or typing the number will bring you to that specific event. The most important part for performance is the large, blue number in the center of the interface which displays the current event. The right side of the interface is used for setting up the patch. The top box has three faders that effect input level, reverb time and output level. Below that box gives the current levels to avoid spiking levels.
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations
As with any electroacoustic piece, one of the difficulties is putting the two aspects of the piece together. The coordination of this piece can happen two different ways. The first is the performer has a second person running the electronics. The engineer would follow along with the score, and press the cue button at the appropriate moments. I find this to be the less desirable option, as it requires another person to be involved and requires rehearsal time. The piece works best with exact synchronization, and it is simply more difficult to achieve that with two people.
The second option is to have the player trigger these events with a foot-pedal. This requires a little bit of practice coordinating, but is ultimately more efficient. Make sure to practice standing, playing, and executing the foot-pedal. One of the pitfalls to avoid is focusing so much on hitting
51
the foot-pedal at the right time and having the playing suffer. I’ve especially seen brass players lessen air support and have other issues arise at trigger moments.
- Coordination of on and off mic
One of the aspects of this piece that needs to be addressed is the coordination of on and off microphone. Aesthetically this creates an interesting effect for the audience, because the sound moves acoustically in the room as the horn player moves, but it also raises and lowers the level of projection in the electronics. Logistically I put the microphone behind me to the right at bell height, and rotated my body to move my horn passed the mic.
- Bell coordination
The piece calls for some interesting bell effects, in addition to the previously discussed on and off mic. The score says “More generalized movements of the bell, irrespective of the microphone, are indicated by height (approximate) and stage direction.” Beyond their sonic effect, bell movements are intended to have a physical drama, mimicking those in Xenakis’s
Eonta (1964). I find this portion of the piece to be more an element of drama than musical effect, requiring the performer to be quite theatric to make the strongest impact on the listeners.
The physical drama can be incredibly effective, but poses some challenges for the horn player. Most schools of horn playing focus on as little movement as possible, but I think we can learn from players who move a lot, like Spanish Virtuoso Soloist Javier Bonet. While he does move quite dramatically when he plays, closer study reveals that he doesn’t change the angle of the horn on the face, and rarely moves his neck. Focusing on movement that doesn’t effect these
52
areas, will produce a more accurate performance.
-Use of highlighters for music
While I have never used a highlighter on my music before, I found it to be incredibly helpful for this piece. There are so many different elements that need to be tracked at one time throughout this piece. I used a yellow highlighter for all of the instructions related to the microphone, these are always above the horn staff. I then used a pink highlighter for the event triggers, which are all below the staff. The colors help identify these elements both in practice and performance (Figure 5).
Figure 5 Kevin Ernste Nisi Example of highlighted music
Hundermer, Thomas Gently Weep 53
Table 5 Thomas Hundemer, Gently Weep
Title Gently Weep Composer Thomas Hundemer Publisher Self-Published Date 2009 Electronics Program Ableton live/logic/yamaha delay/multi-tap delay Technical Requirement microphone, interface, computer, stereo output Duration 9 minutes Difficulty Level 4 Graduate performance major Extended Techniques Right hand technique, flutter tongue Range B2-C6 (F version) A♭2-A5 (D version) Average Pitch 34.75, B4 / 31.75 A♭4
Average Pitch Weighted for Duration 35.34, B4 / 32.34, A4 Difference AP and APWD +0.59 Average Interval 2.36, Whole step Average Interval non 0 3.05, minor 3rd Average Ascending 3.08, minor 3rd Average Descending -3.02, minor 3rd
Overview
The piece begins with a slow ethereal section in a very exotic mode residing mostly in C
Dorian (minor with a raised 6), but with a partially raised fourth using the natural 11th harmonic.
The common use of this natural partial gives the piece a tonal ambiguity that accentuates the floating aesthetic through this first section.
The section beginning at 24 marked “faster and more in tempo,” has several sixteenth note figures that are much more aggressive than the previous section. There is also a shift in tonality, especially in measure 28 with a B natural and an F natural.
54
In measure 41 another slower section begins and briefly sounds like Ab major, before returning to the fast and aggressive section in 52. In measure 55 there is an octave glissando followed by the most major sounding statement of the piece so far. After a few measures of longer note values the agitato section at 70 features the last aggressive section of the piece. In measure 79 the piece begins to unwind with a figure starting on a written Bb that is repeated, then the motive is augmented. The end of the piece has a beautifully haunting melody, echoingthe same ethereal aesthetic as the beginning of the piece.
Horn Part
The horn part has two options including an F part for valved horn and D part for natural horn. For a student who has no experience or interest in natural horn, the piece works well for valved horn. But for those up for the task, the natural horn version is far more effective.
Hundemer shows his mastery of writing for the horn with a wide range of colors and effects that make for a fantastic piece.
[Valved horn version] The valved horn version is much less technically demanding than the natural horn version. There are only a couple of passages with awkward intervallic challenges, otherwise it’s mostly conjunct with an average interval of whole step. The trickiest passage is at measure 72 with some awkward intervals that are made far easier with valves. (music example
12, Horn in D)
55
Music Example 12 Thomas Hundemer Gently Weep mm. 72-73
[Natural Horn] The natural horn part is far more technically challenging for a number of reasons. First, I find horn in D to be more cumbersome and slipperier throughout the partials, especially in the upper register (written A5-Eb6). Secondly, it is simply more difficult to play the correct pitches for someone who is unaccustomed to performing on natural horn. The extra effort to perform this piece on natural horn is well worth it. Listening to Jeffery Snedeker’s recording on his album, The Contemporary Natural Horn, you can hear the importance of the natural horn elements in the piece from the first few measures. From the stopped Eb to the natural harmonic on the F# (music example 13).
Music Example 13 Thomas Hundemer Gently Weep Measures 1-5
The problem with classifying the extended techniques for this piece lies in the definition of stopping versus natural horn right hand technique. I would consider a simple stopped note to be part of the necessary technique for a modern hornist. However, performing a piece such as
56
Gently Weep on natural horn requires another level of skill, but I would not consider it an extended technique.
Electronics Part
The electronics for this piece are by far the most simple in terms of the construction, it is only a multi-tap delay line. The composer doesn’t provide a patch, but it is relatively simple to construct one in Logic, Ableton, or the DAW of your choice. (If you have the software and are feeling lost, Youtube has several tutorials on how to build this effect.)
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations
This piece embodies the flexibility in live electronics performance, with a delay line and no specific synchronized parts, the horn player as a lot of freedom with time. The electronics do not sound like a duet partner, but rather provides a small sound mass behind the horn. I think it very effectively gives the player a feel of a tonality or group of colors.
-Natural Horn Technique
For those who have never performed on natural horn, there is a list of resources in
Appendix C
-Angular lines
Whether on valved horn or natural horn the passage at measure 72 is uncomfortable and takes time playing it slowly to get the fingering pattern, but ultimately the sound in your ear.
Batzner, Jay Silhouettes, Receding 57
Table 6 Jay Batzner, Silhouettes, Receding
Title Silhouettes, Receding Composer Jay Batzner Publisher Unsafe Bull Music Date 2012 Electronics Program Max/MSP Technical Requirement microphone, interface, computer, stereo output Duration 8m Difficulty Level 4 Graduate performance major Extended Techniques None Range B3-C6(notated) A3-Bb5 (played) Average Pitch 33, A4 Average Pitch Weighted for Duration 33.02, A4 Difference AP and APWD +0.02 Average Interval 1.78 Whole Step Average Interval non 0 3.9 Major 3rd Average Ascending 4.07 Major 3rd Average Descending -3.72 Major 3rd
Overview
Silhouettes, Receding begins with a single short note that is echoed by the electronics. This figure slowly grows, adding pitches until it reaches the first sustained note. In measure 17, the piece feels like it deconstructs, beginning with sixteenth notes and slowing to a long sustained pitch. The gradually slowing rhythmic figures with no accompaniment other than the notes reverberating causes the whole piece to slow to a halt. The same type of figure repeats in measure 25. The short notes are all covered while the long pitches are either completely open
(G4) or partially open (A4).
In measure 41 this deconstructionist, winding-down figure ends with the electronics adding
58
amplitude modulation,18 which adds a pitch below what the horn is playing. This note is not synthesized, or made directly from the computer, but rather it is created by effecting the frequencies that the horn is producing. This allows for all of the intricacies of the horn playing to come through in the electronics from stopped sounds to articulations.
This is very effective for the listener because it is a familiar figure, but it adds a brand new element. To someone who has never experienced it before, it can be a jarring sound when suddenly there are multiple notes coming from the horn. The modulator continues through measure 71. For cue 4, the modulator provides a parallel tone, but at cue 5 it changes and provides a unique accompaniment.
The second section begins at 71, with long drawn out melodies featuring mostly open pitches. The quick short figures from the first section melt away and are replaced with the nebulous and spacious lines. These lines start on the fundamental (written C), and keep returning to that starting pitch several times. The figure provides a very constant and solid reminder of the pitch center. As the lines develop they venture further and further from that pitch center both in pitch choice and emphasis of pitch, with notes like F#4 and A♭4. The modulator returns at cue
10 providing an eerie and distant duet partner. This whole section feels expansive until the sudden return to the first section in measure 128. As this section comes to a close the listener may anticipate a return to the tonic, but instead the horn plays a short and loud F#4, a tritone away from the established pitch center.
The return to the A section is much more abrupt than the beginning of the piece. The delay lines from the long melodies quickly fade into a much more chaotic section. The first A section
18 Amplitude modulation adds a carrier wave to the audio signal to produce subsequent pitch(s)
59
featured rhythmic interest, and that interest is built upon with very intervallic and angular writing. Intensity continues to build as the horn part becomes more and more active, and the electronics build a busy, constantly shifting, and unstable backdrop. All leading to the climax at measure 182 with a sustained written C6. A quick descending chromatic line, ends on another deconstructing, unwinding line on a C4, with a little different rhythm that the opening. The piece winds down in the same way that it ramped up at the beginning, finally end with sustained B3.
Horn Part
The horn part for this piece is very demanding, mostly because of the natural horn technique. Looking at the first page, for example, the majority of the notes are covered pitches, like D4, F4, Ab4, etc. This is demanding for the horn player physically to get the notes to come out, but also challenges them aurally to hear the correct pitch. The first section (mm. 1-70) in particular requires fast moving figures, with mostly covered notes.
The second section of the piece (mm. 71-127) is a more lyrical section with longer note values, and more open pitches which are easier to play. These pitches do not require any right hand adjustments, so it will be in the standard position, which will be far more comfortable and familiar to the player.
The final section of the piece is the most difficult with large leaps and very angular writing, demanding the player be able to hear and consistently produce diverse intervals quickly. The part would be difficult on valved horn, and is only made more difficult on the natural horn. This section climaxes at a high C6 with a chromatic descending passage. This passage is the most technically challenging in the piece (music example 14).
60
Music Example 14 Jay Batzner Silhouettes, Receding mm. 176-187
Electronics
The electronics for this piece use only the live horn as source material. Reverb is used heavily and the amplitude and ring modulators add great interest to the piece. The horn remains the focal point throughout the piece, while the electronics are mostly the accompaniment.
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations
The horn part and the electronics don’t need to be perfectly synchronized, like some pieces, but the horn player needs to keep a steady pulse, despite the distracting delay lines.
-First section almost all closed with right hand technique
This piece begins with many closed pitches. In the early stages of learning the work, it is helpful to play these pitches on the valved horn to establish the pitch in your ear. Once we can consistently hear the pitches we need to produce, then we can move onto the natural horn.
61
Perhaps the easiest way to find these fully covered notes is by bending them down from the open partial above them.
-Lip trill stopped from F-Ab
In addition to playing through the harmonic series, codevelop total flexibility over the range, it is a good idea to do some flexibility studies through the stopped partials. The horn feels far more resistant, so finding the balance of air pressure can be tricky. For me, putting a little more air pressure behind the lip trill makes it more successful.
-A Ab Gb F figure
Music Example 15 Jay Batzner Silhouettes, Receding mm. 23
This descending line occurs several times throughout the piece, it was initially challenging until I discovered how to get the pitches to slot on my horn. For the A I cover completely but don’t put pressure onto the bell from my palm, then for the Ab I apply pressure. Then repeat the process for the Gb and F. The key is control of the partials, and flexibility to slide between them when needed.
-Play pitch valved, then stopped
Especially if you’re new to natural horn, one of the best strategies for learning is to play the
62
desired pitch with the valves then finding the partial with right hand technique. I would highly recommend taking notes on the position of the right hand for each note. There are several charts that list out the hand positions, but everyone’s hand is different, and there are many different bell shapes and sizes, so experimentation and keen listening for intonation is critical.
-Sing lines
Even more than with valved horn playing, natural horn playing requires the player to be able to hear the pitches they want to play. The valves can often times provide a crutch and help the player get the correct note if they are close. The natural horn, however, requires that the player buzz the exact pitch, because it doesn’t slot quite as accurately. Do not underestimate the importance of being able to sing all the notes you play! The embouchure cannot produce what the ear cannot hear.
63 Pinkston, Russell Zylamander
Table 7 Russell Pinkston, Zylamander
Title Zylamander Composer Russell Pinkston Publisher Rain Free Press Date 2011 Electronics Program Max/MSP Technical Requirement microphone, interface, computer, stereo output Duration 7 minutes Difficulty Level 4 Graduate performance major Extended Techniques Flutter tongue glissando, thumb tremolo Range D3-C6♯ Average Pitch 33.93, B♭4 Average Pitch Weighted for Duration 32.14, A♭4
Difference AP and APWD -1.79 Average Interval 1.78, Whole step Average Interval non 0 3.39, minor 3rd Average Ascending 3.17, minor 3rd Average Descending -3.61, Major 3rd
Overview
The overarching structure contains 2 different aesthetics that the piece alternates through.
The first style begins the piece with a very ethereal and sustained electronics part. Like many other works in this genre, there is an elongated sense of space through the work with many sustained notes. The piece begins with a concert D and slowly builds a chord note by note ending in a G dominant with a lydian flavor. The horn plays sustained notes coming in and out of the electronics for the first page. In measure 21 the horn plays a melody over the chord. The electronics are playing a chord that sounds similar to a string section playing with tremolo.
64
At rehearsal 2 the tremolo beings to morph into steady pulses, signaling the second phase of the piece focusing on rhythmic pulses instead of sustained tones. Over this pulsating foundation, the horn has a number of sixteenth note figures with a couple of disjunct passages.
The real magic, however, happens in measure 87 where out of the electronics, emerges a horn choir joining the soloist. This effect is present for several minutes providing very lush chords to support to soloist.
At measure 119 there is a computer solo, giving the hornist an opportunity to empty water
(as cited by the commissioner). When the horn re-enters at rehearsal 4 there is a slow lyrical melody with a second horn counterpoint in the electronics, turning into a choir before rehearsal
5. At measure 138, the horn part returns to a rhythmic technical passage exploding into the high register.
The final part begins at rehearsal 6 with a restatement of the lyrical melody from rehearsal
4. The piece winds down the same way that it began, deconstructing slowly until all that remains is a G5 chord.
Horn Part
The horn part to this piece is interesting because it is very simple but there are a few measures that are really difficult to execute at a high level. The entire first section of the piece is very simple with long lines and easy intervals. The B section from measure 48 through 112 on the other hand gets a little more difficult. It is a little difficult to read because eighth note gets the pulse, and there are several sections with fast intervallic leaps (music example 16).
65
Music Example 16 Russell Pinkston Zylamander mm. 74-75
The final section of the piece has several difficult passages, categorized by the technique.
First there are several passages that begin with 32nd note runs, that are made more difficult by the register they are in. The first two, measure 146 and 155, are in the middle register and it can be difficult to achieve clarity in that register (music example 16).
Music Example 17 Russell Pinkston Zylamander mm. 146
The last one is on a high A, and it can be difficult to double tongue in the high range because the movement of the tongue can affect the pitch of the note you’re trying to play (music example
17).
66
Music Example 18 Russell Pinkston Zylamander mm. 160
The second difficult technique is quick register shifts throughout the section. The player needs to play up to a B5 and back down to a G♯3 within a few measures, and the lower pitches need to project and be just as powerful as the high notes.
Thirdly, there are several effects that combine a few different extended techniques, beginning in measure 170 (music example 19).
Music Example 19 Russell Pinkston Zylamander mm. 170-177
The notation shows that the composer wants a flutter tongued note, beginning in at the bottom of the staff. The player then either plays a glissando up to the next note, or they play the gesture written out in measure 172. When practicing these phrases, it is important to keep air moving, constantly move the valves of the horn during the glissandi, and play with conviction.
67
Electronics
One of my favorite aspects of the electronics in this piece is the timbre of the synthesizer used to harmonize with the horn soloist. It is such a pure and beautiful sound that reminds me of the tone used by keyboard players in jazz fusion bands during a ballad. It blends so well with the horn while maintaining a different timbre.
One unique aspect of the electronics for this piece is the player only needs to trigger the beginning of the piece, then the computer listens for specific pitches in the piece to trigger the following event. These trigger notes are notated on the score with an asterisk above them. This is a solution to avoid needing a computer operator as well as relieving the horn player from having to press a stomp pedal during a performance. The concept is a great one, but it would make me nervous to perform it this way. There is risk of the horn player missing that note or getting confused what scene is playing. With taking away the task of controlling the scene changes, this also takes away the peace that comes with having control.
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations
-Conceptualize the 4/8 section as 4/4
One of the visual difficulties of this piece is how it is notated. It can take time to get used to reading in 4/8 where the eighth note gets the beat, especially with the amount of rhythmic variance through this passage.
-Metronome practice
Much like other works I have cited, it is imperative that a metronome is used in practice
68
from the very beginning. The piece must be performed at the correct tempo to align with the electronics, so practice with it from the start.
-Measure 170-177
When a composer uses multiple extended techniques at once, it’s helpful to think of the sonic effect that they are searching for. In this passage the composer is looking for an aggressive sound, flutter tongued and either as a glissando or along the contoured line that
Pinkston has provided. Practicing effects like this take practice and experimentation, but it is very difficult to achieve the right effect without playing with conviction.
69
Faust, Randall Horn Call
Table 8 Randall Faust Horn Call for Horn and Electronic Media
Title Horn Call for Horn and Electronic Media Composer Randall Faust Publisher Randall Faust Date 1976 Electronics Program Originally performed analog Technical Requirement Microphone, mixer, steophonic tape recorders, synthesizer system, power amp, monitor speakers Duration 4 minutes Difficulty Level 5 Virtuoso Extended Techniques Extensive right hand technique Range C3-A5 Average Pitch 33.89, B♭4
Average Pitch Weighted for Duration 33.46, A4 Difference AP and APWD -0.43 Average Interval 2.46, Major 2nd Average Interval non 0 3.36, minor 3rd Average Ascending 3.73, Major 3rd Average Descending -2.99, minor 3rd
Overview
Horn Call has a three-part form that operates through changes in harmonic structure and sound processing, as well as thematic development (Faust). Faust cites the tape delay as an incredibly useful technique offering both canonic imitation and eventually a sound mass, once there are several delays happening. This produces a background harmony as a tonal focus.19
Harmonically the piece has a very traditional progression of tonal centers. A section (C-G), B section (G), and C section (G-C). Thematically the piece begins with an exposition section for
19 Randall Faust, email correspondence with the author, 7 May 2019.
70 the opening, and slowly adds rhythmic interest as the piece progresses. The piece finishes with expansion of rhythmic ideas which creates a sort of slow unraveling of the piece.
Horn Part
The biggest challenge for this piece is the right hand technique. It is interesting to note that
Faust does not say this piece is written for natural horn, but instead says the piece requires frequent hand stopping in which “ancient performance practice interacts with the new.” This concept has since been explored by several other composers included in this project.
Upon playing through this piece for the first time, I could tell that it was written by a horn player. The piece sounds like a very complicated and difficult piece, but lays on the horn incredibly well. The right hand technique is intuitive and the melodic lines make sense from the horn.
Electronics
All of these analog units can be simulated with programs like Max/MSP, but requires the expertise and time of a programmer. (If you have the skills and desire to program this piece, it is a quality piece and well worth the effort!)
The most prominent electronic compositional technique used is tape delay, where the horn is recorded and projected with a delay. Throughout the composition there are several instances where the horn’s delayed line is further manipulated with effects such as a ring modulator.
71
Performance Considerations and Practice Recommendations
Due to the delay line techniques, there are many different interactions between the two lines. The electronic part is notated and should be a measure later than the horn line, and needs to be perfectly in time to avoid a nebulous wash of rhythm. The interactions start as a horn with a echo duet partner. The second part of the piece adds more effects to the horn and it morphs the soundscape to a more digital and distorted sound.
-Practice with a Metronome
This piece needs to be performed with a pulse throughout the work, and electronics will be set to that BPM so it is very important to practice with a metronome at all stages of learning this piece. If one were to practice this piece without a metronome, it would be very easy to get used to it at the wrong BPM, making it very hard to adjust to the electronics.
-Rhythmic Precision
Related to the pulse, there needs to be absolute rhythmic clarity for the piece to be fully effective. The contrast between triplets, sextuplets, and sixteenth notes needs to be readily apparent within a constant pulse. Practicing and recording yourself playing these varying rhythmic figures can help identify moments of rhythmic ambiguity.
-Natural Horn
The stopped notes in this piece are all notes that are fully covered, and as a result should have a very buzzy stopped sound. It creates a great contrast with the open timbre of the horn.
Practice this section by isolating the stopped notes, playing them open, then stopped. Make sure that the right hand is fully sealed to get the right timbre.
72
CHAPTER IV . CONSIDERATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
Based on the survey of pieces in this genre, I believe there are a number of salient characteristics and commonalities that can aid composers in writing works in this genre. The pieces reviewed all exhibit an emphasis on the timbre of the horn and the range of colors it can provide. The graphic user interfaces of the electronics are easy to understand. There was also a healthy collaboration between the composer and the performer.
The horn parts for all of these pieces are interesting but they are not overly complex, making them appropriate for advance undergraduates and graduate performers. The parts are generally in a comfortable range with an appropriate amount of extremes. Pieces extend into the high range as high as C6 and as low as G3, but they do not stay in that range long enough to pose a significant challenge. They’re not too technically challenging in terms of tempo or too disjunct requiring incredible flexibility. The parts do, however, focus on showcasing the horn’s beautiful tone and the range of colors that it can produce.
Aesthetically, these pieces make use of the horn’s wide range of colors, from the lush melodies of Nisi to the strength and aggression of Horn Call. I also find it fascinating that there were so many pieces written for natural horn. Two specifically call for it (both of Batzner’s pieces), one has the option for its inclusion (Hundemer), and one (Faust) has many different elements that are effectively treating the modern valve horn as a natural horn. When I began this project, I never would have guessed that 50% of the pieces would be written for natural horn, which shows the natural horn’s versatility and artistic validity apart from historic performance.
The electronics for these works are easy to operate and the graphic user interfaces are very intuitive and easy to learn. The horn part and the electronics either don’t require specific
73 synchronization, as in Hundemer’s Gently Weep, or they use a stomp pedal to stay synchronized like Ernste’s Nisi. There is also the innovative approach of Shafer’s Pulsar [Variant 1] which displays a scrolling score on the graphic user interface. The most effective pieces in this repertoire take advantage of the many different effects that the electronics produce, which keeps the audience guessing about what will come next.
Lastly all of these pieces have had very healthy collaborations with lots of communication in the compositional process. The ability for collaboration between the commissioner and composer offers incredibly valuable information to both parties. It allows for greater understanding of and insights into the piece from the composer, and it allows for feedback and inspiration from the performer. All of this interaction can only produce a higher quality piece.
Effective Techniques
When looking at pieces in this genre, the best way to evaluate them is in terms of their effectiveness including dramatic effect (to the listener) and compositional effectiveness
(idiomatic horn writing). When evaluating the horn writing effectiveness, it is important to take into consideration how the part lays on the horn and the dramatic effect it has on an audience.
One of the ways that these composers have taken advantage of the timbre of the horn is in natural horn writing. One of these pieces is Silhouettes, Receding, where the beginning of the piece features short and pointed stopped notes that are accentuated by the granular echo in the electronics. They build up tension to a mostly open pitch at the end of the line, which provides a more open sound. This is so effective as build tension to the released a long A that is followed by
two more stopped pitches before returning back to the stopped sound (music example 20 ).
74
Music Example 20 Jay Batzner Silhouettes, Receding mm. 1-16
Another way that composers in this project took advantage of the horn’s timbre was in
Recombinant Serenade. As someone who has studied jazz, I am really drawn into contemporary classical pieces that take advantage of extended harmonies. Biggs uses some really lush harmonies in the electronics beginning with an Ebadd2(no3) chord. The chord voicing is quite spread out but with 2 major seconds, which gives it a little bit of dissonance and color. Over this chord as a drone the horn plays a beautiful line that ends on an A (concert D) the major seventh of the chord, and it is one of the most lovely moments in all of these works (music example 21).
Music Example 21 Christopher Biggs Recombinant Serenade mm. 1
75
One of the fundamental elements of this genre is starting with a solo voice and deciding how you want to accompany that voice. There are some pieces that simply make an echo like
Gently Weep, while others use synthesized sound or live sound to create other textures. One of the most captivating textures is in measure 81 of Pulsar [Variant I], where Shafer creates a horn choir effect with very effective written block chords. The horn plays a C, and the computer processes and adjust the pitch to create full chords. Just to be clear, these sounds are not 100% synthesized, that is made from nothing. They are processed in real time from the horn (music example 22).
Music Example 22 Seth Shafer Pulsar [Variant 1] mm. 81-82
There are some techniques that do not work as well on the horn, such as in Nisi where the horn player has to play a half-valve glissandi from C♯3 to a G5 over 40 seconds of time (music example 23). It is difficult to get a consistent glissando with this technique, especially in the lower range where the partials are further apart. The horn player is constantly fighting the horn’s desire to slot the pitch into a specific partial. Even with utilizing the valves half depressed, it is difficult to control. The technique is made more difficult when the horn player has a particularly
76
“tight” horn, where the horn slots the pitches more aggressively. Compositionally speaking, this effect is almost completely covered up by the electronics. There is a chaotic energy that is constantly growing up till the climax at the end of the figure. The concept behind the technique is a good one, but in performance, it is difficult to achieve what is written.
Music Example 23 Kevin Ernste Nisi mm. 83
There are so many different aspects of the horn repertoire that have not been explored in live electronics pieces. There is room for more exploration of different colors by the use of different mutes, there are only a few passages in this project that use mutes. Most of these works are relatively conservative in terms of tonality, staying mostly within a major key, but there are many possibilities for atonality within this genre. There is also room for more experimentation with time especially with the flexibility of the live electronics. Although this project has been focused on pieces that are appropriate for an undergraduate or graduate student, there were not many pieces that I found in this genre that were overly difficult for these students. With this in mind, I
77 would like to see the genre gain more accessible pieces, but also add more advanced pieces exploring the extremes of the genre.
Conclusion
For the past several decades evolving technology has brought us to this point where a musician can perform works with electronics with relative affordability and self sufficiency.
While composers have invested heavily in some instruments, such as flute, saxophone, or percussion with electronics, the horn has been largely left out. Through the course of this document I have shown some possible explanations for this including the small repertoire, the horn being viewed as a historic or traditional instrument, the mechanics of the instrument, the flexibility the horn has in professional opportunities outside of contemporary music, and the basic difficulty of the instrument. The composers in this document have taken advantage of these possibilities and have written fantastic works that I hope the horn community will become a part of the standard repertoire
The horn and live electronics genre is one that has so much potential, and I think should interest composers. The wide range of colors and sounds that the horn can create offers flexibility to composers and it is a genre that is not saturated with a large number of pieces. With very few pieces in the genre, the composer has so many possibilities for new compositions like the use of multi-phonics, or use a variety of mutes (i.e. straight mute, stop mute, cup mute, or even a bass trombone harmon mute).
For the horn player considering programming these pieces, I believe you will find performing the genre highly rewarding. I have found that audiences respond well to them, simply because of
78
how different the experience is compared to a piano accompaniment, for instance. There are also several skills involved that will improve the performer’s standard technique while learning these pieces like being able to adjust to different sounds.
It is my hope that this document will encourage horn players and teachers to perform these pieces and enjoy exploring the genre. I also hope that composers will discover the possibilities that horn and live electronics provides, and that more compositions will be written.
79
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adcock, Natalie Jo. “Micheal Kallstrom’s Works for Horn and Piano or Electronics A Pedagogical and Performance Guide.” DMA diss., University of Alabama, 2016.
Agrell, Jeffrey. “University of Iowa Suggested Repertoire List.” Accessed October 29, 2018, https//uiowa.edu/horn/current-students/repertoire-list.
Appleton, Jon and Ronald Perera. The Development of Practice of Electronic Music. Englewood Cliffs Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1974.
Baer, Patricia Jean. “Twentieth-Century Concert Music for Unaccompanied Horn.” MA thesis, University of California, Santa Barbara, 1985.
Bassingthwaighte, Sarah. “Electroacoustic Music for Flute.” DMA diss., University of Washington, 2002
Bassingthwaigte, Sara. “Electroacoustic Music for Solo Flute A Compendium of Compositions.” Accessed October 29, 2018, http//www.subliminal.org/flute/.
Baztner, Jay. Email correspondence with the author. 19 April 2020.
Biggs, Christopher. Email correspondence with the author. 4 May 2020.
Bonnell, Bruce, Email correspondence with the author. 6 January 2020.
Brüchle, Bernhard. Horn Bibliographie, 3 vols. Wilhemshaven Heinrichshofen, 1975.
Brümmer, Lodger. “Stockhausen on Electronics, 2004.” Computer Music Journal 32, no. 4 (2008): 10-16.
Brümer, Ludger. “Why Is Good Electroacoustic Music So Good? Why Is Bad Electroacoustic Music So Bad.” Computer Music Journal, 18, no. 4 (1994): 7-8.
Burkholder, J. Peter, Grout, Donald Jay, and Palisca, Claude V. A History of Western Music. New York and London. W.W. Norton & Company, 945.
Camargo, Lucio Edilberto Cuellar. “The Development of Electroacoustic Music in Columbia 1965-1999 An Introduction.” Leonardo Music Journal, 10 (2000): 7-12.
80
Clarke, Micheal. “Analyzing Electroacoustic Music an Interactive Aural Approach.” Music Analysis, 31, no. 3 (2012): 347-380.
Criswell, James. “The Horn in Mixed Media Compositions Through 1991.” DMA diss., University of Maryland, 1995.
Cross, Lowell. A Bibliography of Electronic Music. Toronto University of Toronto Press, 1967.
Duron-VanTuinen, Danielle. “Euphonium and Live Interactive Electronics A Performers Examination of Three New Works.” DMA diss., Arizona State University, 2017.
Ericson, John. “Horn Solo Works.” Accessed October 29, 2018, http//www.public.asu.edu/ ~jqerics/horn_rep.htm.
Ericson, John. “IHS Major Commission Initiative.” Accessed October 29, 2018, https// www.hornsociety.org/about-the-ihs/composition-projects/commissions.
Ernste, Kevin. “Nisi for Horn and Electronics.” Accessed October 29, 2018, http// digital.music.cornell.edu/kevinernste/nisi/.
Ernste, Kevin. Email correspondence with the author. 18 April 2020.
Farkas, Philip. The Art of French Horn Playing. Miami Summy-Birchard Inc., 1956.
Farkas, Philip. Orchestral Passages for the French Horn from Modern French Repertoire. Paris Durand et Cie., 1958.
Farnell, Andy. Designing Sound. (The MIT Press Cambridge London, 2010).
Fasman, Mark J. Brass Bibliography. Bloomington Indiana University Press, 1990.
Faust, Randall. “A Comprehensive Performance Project in Horn Literature with an Essay Consisting of Three Original Concert pieces for Horn and Electronic Media, An Explanation of Techniques Used, and a Listing of Relevant Literature, Vol. 1.” DMA diss., University of Iowa, 1980.
Faust, Randall. “Electronic and compositional Techniques Used in Horn Call,” The Horn Call, XI/2 (April, 1981): 58-61.
Faust, Randall. Email correspondence with the author. 7 May 2019.
81
Foulk, Lin. “Lin Foulk Biard Horn Teacher and Performer.” Accessed October 29, 2018, http// www.linfoulk.org/home/other.html.
Foulk Baird, Lin. Email correspondence with the author. 8 January 2020.
Gardner, Alexandra. “Stayin’ Alive Preserving Electroacoustic Music.” New Music Box, Oct. 31, 2013. https//nmbx.newmusicusa.org/stayin-alive-preserving-electroacoustic-music/
Giomi, Francesco. “Live Electronics in Luciano Berio’s Music.” Computer Music Journal, 27, no. 2 (2003): 30-46.
Gregory, Robin. The Horn. London Faber and Faber, 1961.
Hamilton, Elizabeth Charlotte. The Pedagogy of the French Horn. Rochester University of Rochester Press, 1945.
Harvey, Jonathan. “Electronics in Music A New Aesthetic?.” Journal of Royal Society of Arts 133, no. 5345 (1985): 313-319.
Hermansson, Sören. “Sören Hermansson, French Horn.” Accessed October 29, 2018, www.sorenhermansson.com.
Hoke, Amanda. “Lindsey Goodman The Flutist’s Electroacoustic Primer.” Accessed October 29, 2018, http//thefluteexaminer.com/lindsey-goodman-flutists-electroacoustic-primer/.
Howe, Hubert S. Electronic Music Synthesis. New York W.W.Norton and Co., Inc., 1975.
Howe, Marvin C. “A Critical Survey of Literature, Materials, Opinions, and Practices Related to Teaching the French Horn.” PhD diss. The University of Iowa, 1966.
Hundemer, Thomas. Email correspondence with the author. 20 May 2020.
James, Matthew. “Fathoming a Soundworld The Horn and Electronics.” The Horn Call, (2015), 43-45.
Janetzky, Kurt and Bernhard Brüchle. The Horn. Portland Amadeus Press, 1988.
Levine, Lawrence W. “Jazz and American Culture.” The Journal of American Folklore, 102, no. 403 (1989): 6-22.
82
Loke, Erika Binsley. “A Survey of Works for Horn and Fixed Media from 1968-2016.” DMA diss., University of Maryland, 2017.
Longyear, Ryan M.. “Principles of Neglected Musical Repertoire.” Journal of Research in Music Education, 18, no. 2 (1970): 167-177.
MacDonald, Alistair. “Performance Practice in the Presentation of Electroacoustic Music.” Computer Music Journal, 19, no. 4 (1995): 88-92.
Morley-Pegge, Reginald. The French Horn. London Ernest Benn Limited, 1960.
Overholt, Dan. “A Multimodal System for Gesture Recognition in Interactive Music Performance.” Computer Music Journal, 33, no. 4 (2009): 69-82.
Reedy, Deena. “Commissioning New Repertoire.” The Flutist Quarterly, 4 (2014): 34-38.
Schouten, Sarah. “An Annotated Guide and Interactive Database for Solo Horn Repertoire.” DM diss., Florida State University, 2012.
Schuller, Gunther. Horn Technique. London Oxford University Press, 1962.
Shafer, Seth. Email correspondence with the author. 21 April 2020.
Strempel, Eileen. “Consortium Commissioning Jocelyn Hagen’s Song Cycle Kiss.” Journal of Singing, 73, no. 3 (2017): 251-260.
Thomas, Gregory V. “The Canonization of Jazz and Afro-American Literature.” Callaloo, 25, no. 1, Jazz Poetics (2002): 288-308.
Tuckwell, Barry. Horn. New York Schirmer Books, 1983.
Unsworth, Adam. Email correspondence with the author. 12 January 2020.
Valiquet, Patrick. “The Spatialization of Stereophony Taking Positions in Post-War Electroacoustic Music.” International Review of the Aesthetics of Sociology of Music. 43, no. 2 (2012): 403-421.
Voorhees, Jerry L.. “Music in the New Age The Challenge of Electronics.” Music Educators Journal, 73, no. 2 (1986): 32-36.
83
Wilkins, Wayne. The Index of French Horn Music. Magnolia AR The Music Register, 1978.
Zajicek, Libor. “The History of Electroacoustic Music in the Czech and Slovak Republics.” Leonardo Music Journal, 5 (1995): 39-48.
Zyla, Luke. Email correspondence with the author. 8 January 2020.
84
APPENDIX A. CONTEMPORARY HORN PLAYERS
List of significant contemporary horn players that were not covered in this project.
Matthew S James is a horn player based in Calgary who focuses on radical performance and new music advocacy. He performs as an orchestral musician, commissions and premieres new avant-garde works, and teaches as well. He studied at the University of Calgary for his undergraduate degree and at (figure out university) in Chicago for his master’s degree and post- graduate certificate.
James has performed with many orchestras such as the Calgary Philharmonic Orchestra, the
Edmonton Symphony, and Saskatoon Symphony. He is a founding member and Artistic Director of the Timepoint Ensemble, which is a new music ensemble that was established in 2015.
In addition to performing new works, he also provides a number of resources on his website such as a blog, practice logs, and free sheet music for exercises. James has created content that can help out horn players with modern performances, such as his most recent blog/video about flutter tongue exercises.20
Soren Hermasson is an internationally known soloist based in Sweden. He has held orchestra positions in Norrköping and Gothenburg, he has also taught at institutions such as Gothenburg,
University of Wisconsin Madison, and University of Michigan. He has commissioned and
Matthew James. Matthew James Website. https//mathewsjameshorn.com/band. Accessed 9/20/2020
85
premiered a large number of works, around 60 with around 10 including electronics.
Hermansson’s commissioning has continued to push the boundaries of what the horn is capable of.
He is one of the champions of the horn in the contemporary music community, constantly commissioning and premiering new works. He recently released an album of pieces for horn and electronics entitled “Horn and Sound.”21
Robert Patterson is a horn player and composer based in Memphis, Tennessee. He plays in the Memphis Symphony Orchestra, and he also contributes to the community with his blog the contemporary hornist. He is the founder and director of the Riverside Wind Consort, which is a chamber group for wind instruments.
Patterson holds degrees from the University of Pennsylvania, University of Memphis, and
Oberlin college. He studied composition with George Crumb, Jay Reise, Don Freund, and John
Baur. He is also a software developer and his plug-ins for Finale are used worldwide.22
Christine Chapman is a horn player originally from Michigan who studied at the University of Michigan and Indiana University. After her studies she moved to Germany for an orchestral position. She is a member of Ensemble Musikfabrik and has worked with the worlds leading composers. Notably she premiered Karlheinz Stockhausen’s Nebadon from his larger work
Soren Hermansson. Soren Hermansson Website. http//www.sorenhermansson.com/ about.html. Accessed 1/17/2021 Robert Patterson. Robert Patterson Website. http//robertgpatterson.com/-bio/bio.html. Accessed 1/17/2021
86
Klang.
Chapman has worked with composers like Wolfgang Rihm, Peter Eötvös, Rebecca Saunders, and Georg Friedrich Haas, Harry Partch, La Monte Youn, and Sun Ra. “Trying to see through the technicalities of playing to bring out the soul of the music; that is what’s so exciting to me.”23
Joshua Michal is the Assistant Professor of Horn at University of Massachusetts in
Amherst. He performs in the Rhode Island Philharmonic, Hartford Symphony, and serves on the faculty at Interlochen. He has performed with orchestras from Chicago, Cincinnati, Boston Lyric
Opera, Albany, Portland, and Columbus. He recently released an album with MSR Classics entitled Ekphrasis New Music for Horn and Electronics.
‘
Christine Chapman, Musik Fabrik Website, https//www.musikfabrik.eu/en/ensemble/ members/christine-chapman, accessed 1/17/2021
87
APPENDIX B. RECOMMENDED STANDARD WORKS
Genre Composer Piece Year
Unaccompanied Apostel, Hans Erich Sonatine, op. 39 1964 Solo with Orchestra Arnold, Malcolm Concerto No. 1 1945 Solo with Orchestra Arnold, Malcolm Concerto No. 2 1956 Unaccompanied Arnold, Malcolm Fantasy for Horn 1966 Solo with Orchestra Artunian, Alexander Horn Concerto 1970 Solo with Orchestra Atterberg, Kurt Concerto for Horn 1928 Unaccompanied Baumann, Hermann Elegia for solo natural 1984 horn Solo with Piano Beethoven, Ludwig Van Sonata, Op.17 1800 Solo with Orchestra Bellini, Vincenzo Horn Concerto in F 1790 Unaccompanied Berge, Sigurd Hornlokk 1972 Unaccompanied Bernstein, Leonard Elegy for Mippy I 1950 Solo with Piano Bozza, Eugene En Foret 1944 Solo with Piano Bozza, Eugene En Irlande 1951 Solo with Orchestra Chabrier, Emmanuel Larghetto 1875 Solo with Orchestra Cherubini, Luigi Sonata No. 2 1804 Solo with Piano Danzi, Franz Sonata in Eb 1804 Solo with Piano Dukas, Paul Villanelle 1905 Solo with Wind Faust, Randall Concerto for Horn and 1987 Ensemble Wind Ensemble Solo with Electronics Faust, Randall Horn Call for Horn and 1997 Electronic Media Solo with Orchestra Forster, Christoph Concerto in Eb 1720 Solo with Piano Francaix, Jean Canon in Octave 1954 Solo with Orchestra Gallay, Jacques Francois Horn Concerto No. 1 1831 Solo with Symphonic Gillingham, David Concerto for Horn and 2008 Band Symphonic Band Solo with Piano Glazunov, Alexander Reverie, Op. 24 1890 Solo with Orchestra Gliere, Reinhold Concerto, Op. 91 1951 Solo with Piano Gliere, Reinhold Intermezzo 1908 Solo with Piano Gliere, Reinhold Nocturne 1908
88
Solo with Piano Gliere, Reinhold Romance 1908 Solo with Piano Gliere, Reinhold Valse Triste 1908 Solo with Orchestra Haydn, Joseph Concerto 1 in D 1762 Solo with Orchestra Haydn, Joseph Concerto 2 in D 1781 Solo with Piano Heiden, Bernhard Sonata 1986 Solo with Piano Hindemith, Paul Concerto 1950 Solo with Piano Hindemith, Paul Sonata for Horn 1940 Solo with Piano Hindemith, Paul Concerto for alto horn 1943 Solo with Orchestra Jacob, Gordon Concerto 1951 Unaccompanied Ketting, Otto Intrada 1977 Unaccompanied Krol, Bernhard Laudatio 1966 Solo with Piano Krufft, Nikolaus Von Sonata in E 1814 Solo with Orchestra Larsson, Lars-Erik Concertino 1957 Solo with Orchestra Ligeti, Gyorgy Hamburg Concerto 2002 Solo with Orchestra Maxwell Davies, Peter Horn Concerto 1999 Unaccompanied Maxwell Davies, Peter Sea Eagle for Horn 1982 Unaccompanied Messiaen, Olivier Des Canyons Aux 1974 Etoiles… Appel Interstellaire Solo with Orchestra Mozart, Wolfgang Concerto 1 in D, K. 412 1791 Solo with Orchestra Mozart, Wolfgang Concerto 2 in Eb, K. 417 1783 Solo with Orchestra Mozart, Wolfgang Concerto 3 in Eb K. 447 1784 Solo with Orchestra Mozart, Wolfgang Concerto 4 in Eb K. 495 1786 Solo with Orchestra Mozart, Wolfgang Concert Rondo 1781 Solo with Orchestra Musgrave, Thea Horn Concerto 1791 Solo with Electronics Musgrave, Thea The Golden Echo 1986 Solo with Orchestra Penderecki, Krzysztof Concerto for Horn 2008 Unaccompanied Persichetti, Vincent Parable 1973 Solo with Piano Poulenc, Francis Elegy 1957 Solo with Orchestra Rosetti, Antonio Concerto in D minor 1790 Solo with Orchestra Rosetti, Antonio Concerto 2 in Eb 1790 Solo with Piano Saint-Saens, Camille Romance in F, Op. 36 1874 Solo with Piano Saint-Saens, Camille Romance in E, Op. 67 1882
89
Solo with Piano Saint-Saens, Camille Morceau de Concert 1887 Solo with Piano Schumann, Robert Adagio and Allegro, Op. 1849 70 Solo with Orchestra Strauss, Franz Concerto, Op. 8 1865 Solo with Piano Strauss, Franz Nocturno, Op. 7 1864 Solo with Piano Strauss, Franz Theme and Variations, Op. 1875 13 Solo with Orchestra Strauss, Richard Concerto 1 1882 Solo with Orchestra Strauss, Richard Concerto 2 1924 Solo with Piano Strauss, Richard Andante 1888 Solo with Orchestra Telemann, Georg Philipp Concerto in D 1740 Solo with Orchestra Weber, Carl Maria von Concertino in E 1806 Solo with Piano Wilder, Alec Sonata 3 1970 Solo with Orchestra Williams, John Concerto for Horn 2003 Average 1899.87
90
APPENDIX C. NATURAL HORN RESOURCES
Performers who wish to perform these pieces on natural horn, but have no prior experience might want to consult natural horn resources such as Paul Austin’s A Modern Valve
Horn Player’s Guide to Natural Horn, Anneke Scott’s Historical Horns Handbook Natural
Horn, an Introduction, and the historic tutors or etude books of Hampel Dauprat, Duvernoy, and
Domnich. To perform these pieces well, the performer will need to take time exploring and practicing standard hand horn. Kopprasch etudes are a great place to start. I would also recommend working towards playing all major and minor scales on the open F horn, which forces you to learn all of the chromatic pitches and to use different right hand patterns.
91
APPENDIX D. PIECES CONSIDERED BUT NOT USED
Composer Piece Year
Eric Lemmon Three Miniatures for 2011 Horn and Electronics
Per Martensson Define 2012-2013 Mark Oliveiro Thunor’s Gate 2012-2013 Lula Romero Anabasis 2011-2012 Steve Snowden Fathoms 2009 Larry Lake Polychron N/A