Emanation of a Cosmic Idea

Yet another piece for solo piano which sort of serves also as a study of a tuba - violin piece I am planning to compose. I made extensive use of the first 5 overtones where no detunings are necessary, but I am planning to implement spectrality even more in future pieces (for piano or not). Enjoy!

Emanation of a Cosmic Idea

Emanation of a Cosmic Idea.pdf

i love it. it's like a stature. it's interesting to see what you come up with if you introduce more spectrality to it. possibly, a vitrage. the ones the light comes in through in churches.

i like the steady rhythmic flow being seen through the spectre of tonaly deviant organization. deffering from the initial steadiness.

i especially enjoy thought movements that start by sort of compact idea and disolve leaving a trace. the unnamable of the event.

beautiful, my fellow.

Yes. Beautiful!

I found it a rewarding work. But not a piece I would play myself (the audience woudn't like it).

VERY meditative... and perhaps the piece I've been looking for myself for years! Perhaps... I should try it just once!

:)

Thank you guys! I am glad you liked it!

Spectrality is very subtly used in this piece, but it's the first time I made conscious use of it. I think there are "mysteries" hidden in the overtone series and the very nature of the sound left to be discovered. Metamusical stuff, really...

Pliorius, you talk and poetry comes out of your mouth! What's a stature btw? Anything to do with sculpture? I am curious 'cause I always liked making connections between different arts. Poetry and painting, music and sculpture. I am convinced that sculptures "sing", but we cannot hear them.

Pieter, why don't you trust the audience? If you like it the audience will feel it.

Thanks!

probably, stature is statue, which means i made a mistake. BUT - stature fit well too. joining we could say - the statue of achievment and considerable height or reputation :)

in a sense, it (your piece) reminds me of part's Lamentate piano movements, at least the confidence of\in it. he said to have been inspired by a certain sculpture for this work.

Never heard Lamentate, but I do feel confident with the music I am doing now. Quite lost because it's all new to me, but confident nonetheless...

You are easily one of my favorite composers here

Thanks! :)

Very nice piece. Beautiful, yet dissonant, very interesting. Good job.

I love your aesthetic on this and your other pieces so so much. So much in your music that lets the piano breathe in its natural resonance, letting light shine through the cracks. Can you describe your process for a piece like this? I am curious.

Hello jcharney!

I am sorry for not replying earlier. I just saw your post.

I am glad you liked the piece. I don't have a particular compositional process. All these pieces of mine are just an effort for sonic expansion. I am not so interested in the creation of counterpoint or melody, but instead I emphasise on every sound because I perceive it to be a work of its own.

Yet another piece for solo piano which sort of serves also as a study of a tuba - violin piece I am planning to compose. I made extensive use of the first 5 overtones where no detunings are necessary, but I am planning to implement spectrality even more in future pieces (for piano or not). Enjoy!

Emanation of a Cosmic Idea

First of all, the statement that no retunings are necessary to accurately represent the first 5 overtones is grossly inaccurate. If your fundamental is D, the 3rd, F-Sharp, is 13.69 cents sharp on the piano, the 5th, A, is 1.96 cents flat, going beyond that, minor 7th, C, is 31.17 cents flat, your major second, E, is 3.91 cents flat, your F is 2.49 cents sharp, your G is 29.22 cents sharp, your A-Flat is 48.68 cents sharp, your B-Flat is 40.53 cents flat, and your B is 5.87 cents flat (did I miss any pitches in your piece?). Aside from the fundamental, there is not a single pitch that doesn't need retuning on your piano. The limit on human pitch change perception is about 1.5 cents, so all of these are audibly "out of tune" on the piano (also, it makes a huge difference acoustically, even if someone can't quite here a clear difference between A at 900 cents and A at 901.96 cents).

That being said, your piece could really benefit from some rhythmic variety instead of just half- and whole-notes. I thought your pitch language was there, however instead of constantly repeating the D so many times in different octaves, it would be more interesting if it was more sparse, and if you saved the octave leaps for a little bit. Also, your leaps are a bit predictable. I'd also say get away from the strict note-against-note counterpoint you've got going on here. You have nice pitch choices, but I found the piece very plain and very predictable.

I didn't know retunings where necessary for the very first overtones. Is there some kind of chart I could consult for future compositions?

I really wanted to keep the piece as simple as possible. The rhythmic monotony was used in order to evoke the sense of metaphysical, something distant we can't be sure of. If I wished to add some rhythmic variety I would prefer to make more use of silences in varied lengths. There are some moments I am not very satisfied with either, but haven't yet sit down to revise them.

Thank you for your feedback!

I think the unvarying rhythm gives this piece it's character. I wouldn't change it.

I think the unvarying rhythm gives this piece it's character. I wouldn't change it.

I won't change it. My dissatisfaction has to do with some of the pitches I selected.

I didn't know retunings where necessary for the very first overtones. Is there some kind of chart I could consult for future compositions?

12tET is a very poor approximation for Just intonation. There is not a single pitch in the overtone series (aside from the fundamental, which, lets be clear here, can be ANY pitch imaginable) that corresponds to 12tET (or at least not until we get over the 500,000,000th partial or something like that... if that). There are pitches that are close. But that's about it.

I just did a quick Google search for you -- the Wikipedia page on the harmonic series has the first 20 overtones listed and their difference from 12tET (rounded to the nearest whole number). Or you could do what I did and use the ratios to make your own chart. I currently have charts of the overtone and the undertone series up to the 1024th partial. Its a lot of work, but its good to have. Its also a good way to get to know the overtone series (especially if you plan on working in Just intonation). On top of that, you're going to have to do it if you want those higher partials anyway, I think the highest chart I've ever seen went up to the 32nd partial (which only gives you 16 different pitches, also keep in mind that, while some composers work around the 50th or so overtone (31+ different pitches), La Monte Young has gone up to at least 5000th partial in his works, so the sky is really the limit with this).

I really wanted to keep the piece as simple as possible. The rhythmic monotony was used in order to evoke the sense of metaphysical, something distant we can't be sure of. If I wished to add some rhythmic variety I would prefer to make more use of silences in varied lengths. There are some moments I am not very satisfied with either, but haven't yet sit down to revise them.

I'm not saying I want your rhythms to be complex, far from it. However, slightly different durations (half note, then a half note in an 8th note quintuplet with the last 8th note tied to a dotted quarter, then an 8th note tied to a dotted quarter in an 8th note septuplet, etc. -- I guess that is more complex) or, a more Feldman-like approach with free rhythm will allow certain harmonies to breath more. I think various sized spaces of silence (or fading resonance) is a great idea. But even just separating the hands at times will create a sense of rhythmic variety.

I don't mean to say that no part of the piece should have the texture you use through out. However, slight variations within it (the overall feel/atmosphere should stay the same) will make it a bit more interesting to listen to.

Also, since your idea was to explore these harmonics, have you thought about actually trying it out using the proper tunings?

Could you please explain to me the way I can compute the partials? I was also wondering if it is the same for every instrument.

Rhythmic variety is not something I'd like to have in this piece. I have fermata like changes of the rhythm in some places and I think they are enough. Proper tunings would be nice to be implemented, but I wonder how practical that would be for such a short piece...

Well, there are a couple of ways you could go about it, basically you're going to be converting interval ratios into cents. Its kind of weird to do if you're not used to working with it, and I think the easiest thing would be for you to send me a message or something and we can figure out a time to talk. I think it'll be a lot clearer if I can sort of talk you through some of it.

The harmonic series itself is always the same, regardless of instrument, however some instruments do not allow certain partials. For example, while a string or a saxophone could produce any partial (theoretically -- of course you probably shouldn't expect a cello player to be able to produce higher than maybe the 11th harmonic max) the clarinet only produces odd numbered partials. But if our fundamental is C, our second partial is always C, our third is always G (+1.96 cents), our fourth is always C, our fifth is always E (-13.69 cents), our sixth is always G (+1.96 cents), our seventh is always B-Flat (-31.17 cent), our eighth is always C, etc. But those overtones that are available basically depend on the shape of the instrument.

If you want a bit more in depth discussion on the differences between instruments, I recommend reading through this website, its all about the acoustics of instruments.

In terms of practicality, no it probably would not be too practical to retune a piano for such a short work. However tuning a piano to Just intonation (you're actually working here more with overtone tuning than, say, 7-limit Just intonation or something, that is to say you're working with the actual harmonic series, not intervals from it, though it's all Just) is not unheard of. If you can get a hold of it, you should check out LaMonte Young's Well-Tuned Piano, Ben Johnston's Suite for Microtonal Piano (which is a lot closer to what you're talking about, tuning-wise) or the Sonata for Microtonal Piano, Terry Riley's The Harp of New Albion, and Michael Harrison's piano music. I'm pretty sure that Lou Harrison's Concerto for Piano and Javanese Gamelan has the piano in Just intonation, as with his Piano Concerto (or is it in a well-temperament? I don't remember anymore). Kyle Gann might have some Just intoned piano works as well, but I'm not sure. If you use an electric keyboard its a lot easier to retune. If you can get your hands on H-Pi Insturment's tuning box, you can flick through tunings really easily (I actually used this in the performance of a piece for chamber orchestra that I wrote, I needed an electric organ tuned to 21 and 1/4 tone equal temperment). You'd have to severely sacrifice tone quality in your piece, but its a good way to at least try it out. You can also download their software for free and play around with tunings rather easily, which may be a good way to experiment with these ideas.

I'll admit I don't fully understand the beauty of its deliberate primitivism, but I found it soothing. :)

Great information Charlie, thanks! I'll send you a pm for further clarification on overtones and tuning. First I'll visit the website link you provided.

Yegudiil, I wouldn't call the style primitivism. My focus is on the sound itself, but still because of my lack of knowledge the result is not very satisfying at times. I am glad you find it soothing! :)

No problem, I look forward to hearing from you.

This definitely isn't primitivism, I'm not sure where that's even coming from with this piece.