A. Picking the vocabulary
When I want to apply the skill and knowledge retrieved from the individual exercises in an interlude, I first make a list of the vocabulary or ideas based on the two chosen pieces that I think work well. I found that not all exercises are beneficial for every style or piece. For example, the exercises from the harmony pool don't work well for an atonal piece. A second example would be not using the motives pool for a piece without clear and manageably long motives. So the list of possible usable vocabulary would be made based on those findings. In the analysis made in the beginning of chapter II it is possible to see what the most typical or interesting material is. This material in my opinion can be something very recognizable and unique of a certain composition, or it can be material that inspires me. On the right you find some pictures of some of the lists I used in preparation of my performances.
I also discovered the interlude does not work when the list is too long, because there is too much to remember. When I try to consciously use everything I learned in one improvisation, the improvisation becomes too rational and my ideas don’t flow freely. This, I think, was also part of the problem I got in the video shown at the end of chapter II. Another possibility is to have a longer list, but not use all of the ideas of the list. This second possibility could be preferred since it is an even more improvisational approach, but also has the challenge of giving the performer the fear of missing clarity.
C. Performing
Before improvising for an audience, it is important to let go of all of the exercises and switch into performance mode. Some ideas concerning this mode are in the mindset pool from chapter II.
On a personal level I noticed that I did well when either having a really long period (such as three months) or either a really short one (such as a week) to prepare an interlude. I think when having a long time, I had the room to really master the exercises and add it to my intuitive, active vocabulary. When I had a short period of time, things were so new I couldn’t overthink and that also seemed to work. However, with a medium period of time (three weeks for example) I could get to most exercises and practice, but was not able to move the vocabulary to my ready knowledge. Then I would have a very cerebral approach to choosing and transforming the material, when trying to apply the performance mode. This way the improvisation did not feel as free as I wished. .
Furthermore, next to the mindset and preparation there are more formal aspects in relation to the structure of the concert to take into consideration:
-Do I want applause before or after the interlude?
-Do I connect it with or without a musical stoppage to the next piece?
-Will I add staging and movement?
-Will I verbally explain to the audience what I am doing? Or via a program booklet? Or not at all?
I will now discuss these aspects on the basis of two performances and explain why I made these decisions:
Master 1-recital, October 18th
On the 18th of October 2022 I played my master 1 recital in Studio 2 at the Royal Conservatoire of The Hague. This was my first public performance with interludes. I used the same format for the presentation of both interludes. I let the listener clap after the first piece and then interrupted the applause with my improvisation. I made this decision, because the endings of the pieces demanded applause in my opinion and the opinion of my main subject teacher. Also, it gave the musician that was playing with me a moment to exit the stage. To keep the music flowing and add an extra surprise, I interrupted the applause with my interludes. I also used movement to invite the player of the next piece to join me.
For this recital I decided to use a program booklet. The reasons behind the booklet were that I wanted to inform the audience about my concept in order to get feedback. Also, I didn’t want to interrupt the atmosphere too much with speech, since this would be in contrast with the connecting goal of interluding. On the right you can find the program booklet and full video of this performance:
This performance was a first experience with interluding for an audience. I learned that movement and improvisational mindset are crucial.
In a try-out prior to my actual exam my interludes more or less had the same vocabulary and structure as in the exam itself. However, because of my stage presence and mindset it did not come across well according to my try-out public. I got the comment from my main subject teacher that the interlude did not sound improvised and free, which contradicts the concept. This try-out was the first time I showed my improvisations to a teacher. It was a big step to get the confidence to do this. Accepting the performance fear and the vulnerability that comes with improvising was an important step in my process.
After the try-out I concluded I needed to shift my focus from fear of not improvising a clear interlude to enjoyment. This made it start to sound more improvised. This is an aspect that I am still working on. The second aspect that helped was adding movement. Also by physically inviting the next player, the concept of connecting pieces became more clear visually.
Ruth invites…, October 30th
During the living room concert on the 30th of October I tried out different ways to present these improvisations. I consciously chose to experiment with different ways to see what worked best according to the feelings of the musicians and the feedback of the audience. Again I decided to use a program booklet for the same reasons as before.
The first prelude started from the four musicians tuning. In the first half of the concert I left no room for applause. My goal was to clearly present the concept of seamless connections by forming a longer block with two improvisations and two pieces in contrasting styles. I wanted to start the concert with a bigger build-up of musical tension. To add variety I took a longer break after this more complex block. There was a first applause and I welcomed the audience by saying a few words.
After the next piece there was also applause, because the end of the piece demanded it with its virtuosity and clear ending cadence. To keep the flow I interrupted this applause with an interlude. This way I felt the pace of the concert kept flowing.
Sometimes I really connected the improvisation seamlessly to the next piece. To try out different formats, there were times I left a little bit of silence. Also, I chose to not talk about the music during the concert. Instead I made a program booklet for the audience to read with information on the pieces, the project and the approach of the improvisations. I thought there was a good balance between connecting some pieces seamlessly and sometimes leaving space for words or applause. I think this variety can be important to give the audience and musicians room to breathe. Thus, I think I will keep using different ways to present interludes in one concert. In the next chapter there is a description on how the audience experienced these formal aspects.
The only possibility that I didn’t try out is having applause after a prelude or interlude, since I felt this would break too much with the concept of interluding. On the right you can find the program booklet and full video of this performance:
When working more intensely the week before the performance on the improvisations, I discovered a lot and gained freedom and ideas in my improvisations. The biggest thing I learned is that I can trust my ability to improvise. Only by doing it more for an audience, this trust can grow.
Some extra context when reviewing the recording of this concert is needed: A few hours before the concert I had an accident with my violin. It was still playable, but there was extra noise on the lower strings. This proved to be hard and at moments I found myself distracted. I ended up trying to ignore it during the performance. In the general rehearsal I thought my improvisations and mindset were more carefree. At the concert I could not be as creative in the improvisations, because of my worries about the sound of my violin.
← Linear interlude from Van Beurden to Schnittke, filmed on 13/10/2022
B. Structure
In this phase the chosen vocabulary is placed in a structure while keeping the whole concert program in mind. I now decide the program order and where it would be a good place to do an interlude. I make these decisions thinking about contrasts, the different instrumentations of the compositions, a build-up, etc. So far I have performed two programs using the interluding concept: my Master 1-recital on the 18th of October 2022 and a living room concert on the 30th of October 2022. This last concert was recorded and filmed with the support of ‘Stichting De Zaaier’.
Hill mentions briefly that organ player Christophe Bull once stated it is possible to create a hybrid piece starting with motives of the first piece, then jumping back and forward as a ‘mash-up’ and ending with material of the second piece. I had similar ideas as Bull and (as described in Chapter I) I started by working in a linear fashion. So starting in one style, making a transition and ending up in a different style. I put the selected elements from the list made before in a certain order, and decided on a modulation and pivot chord if applicable. On the left one can find examples three examples of linear interludes. Below the used structures are described, as well as the corresponding time stamps:
Van Beurden to Schnittke
This interlude begins with double stops inspired by the first movement by Van Beurden. Thereafter a rhythmic motive from the second movement is explored (00:35). After a culmination a sentence inspired by the theme of the first movement by Van Beurden is presented (00:52). Next a twelve-tone row based on Schnittke's first movement can be heard (01:05). The interlude ends with some rhythmic motives from the second movement by Schittke (01:21).
Bach to Piazzolla
The beginning is an ornamented bass line in D minor that starts in the Bach idiom. Soon style elements of Piazzolla are implemented (00:37). There is a modulation to F# minor. The ending is variations on a Piazzolla-inspired ostinato (01:00).
Ravel to Schnittke
The Ravel part of the interlude is presented by four different motives from the four different movements (at 00:00, 00:23, 00:35 and 00:45). Next a twelve-tone row based on Schnittke's first movement can be heard (01:00). The interlude ends with some rhythmic motives from the second movement by Schittke (01:15).
However, there are also other possibilities to approach the structure of an interlude. For example, at my concert of October 30th, I started with a prelude where I present the dominant tonality of the Bach I will play afterwards. In this prélude I mix some of the typical Bach arpeggios and harmony with my own taste. However, in the middle of the prélude I also hint a little bit rhythmically to the Piazzolla that we will hear later. This is a non-linear way to build an interlude. By using the Bach harmony simultaneously with the Piazzolla rhythm, both idioms exist simultaneously. In my experiment there is only a small hint, but this way of interluding could be taken a lot further.
Another thing I recently started to explore is to have interactions with a second musician whilst interluding. Thus we are improvising together. I found musicians who want to explore this idea with me. So far we only added some playful percussion on the guitar in the end of a Bach to Piazzolla interlude. In this short passage I already noticed how this made my focus shift away from the used material to the dialogue.
In the future I will keep developing new and more complex ways of interluding, where I play with multiple players or combine different styles simultaneously. However, in this research I am mainly focusing on building the linear interludes using required vocabulary from two pieces. This is the starting point from which creativity can expand in a later stage of my development.
