In this reflection, I aim to practically explore what lies in the concept of affordances regarding musical instruments. How can the understanding of affordances influence our approach to shaping music?
Affordance is “the quality or property of an object that defines its possible uses or makes clear how it can or should be used”[1]. The term was introduced by the American psychologist James Jerome Gibson (1904-1979) as a term in the study of cognition in his 1966 book, The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems[2], and is a widely used term in different forms of psychology, design, human-computer interaction, robotics and language education amongst others. Gibson defines affordance in his final book from 1979, The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception:
“The affordances of the environment are what it offers the animal, what it provides or furnishes, either for good or ill. The verb to afford is found in the dictionary, the noun affordance is not. I have made it up. I mean by it something that refers to both the environment and the animal in a way that no existing term does. It implies the complementarity of the animal and the environment.”[3]
When looking at the affordances of musical instruments, this is the relationship between the instrument and the musician. Each particular instrument has a specific set of affordances or properties that define its use. The properties of the instrument will differ depending on the era of origin, make, model, material, keywork system, and construction methods used.
How is this relevant to phrasing? Phrasing is how a performer shapes music. Shaping music will inherently be influenced by the affordances of a particular instrument since the properties of the instrument together with the musician is what allows its function. Phrasing is only possible in cooperation with the instrument and thus the understanding of these affordances can be vital in a musical performance.
I have used a period boxwood instrument, a modern boxwood instrument, and a modern grenadilla instrument as tools for research on phrasing. The method is to experiment with changing tools and techniques and use the results to expand on the understanding of phrasing. By switching tools between a period instrument and two different modern instruments (in both boxwood and grenadilla), I have identified and related to different techniques, thus establishing how the affordances of the different instruments influence my phrasing.
I have identified some of the relationships between phrasing on a period instrument and a modern instrument:
The modern instrument is more homogenous or even, whilst the period instrument is more heterogeneous or uneven. The modern instrument has roughly the same resistance through all its notes, whilst the period instrument has many notes that are tight, stuffy, and have different resistances throughout its register. The modern instrument is slow to respond because of its resistance and weight whilst the period instrument is fast to respond because of its lack of resistance and weight. Basically, only dynamics change on the modern instrument when making a crescendo or diminuendo. Sound quality, focus, timbre, and intonation change when making a crescendo or diminuendo on the period instrument. A closed mouthpiece made of hard rubber and heavier reeds makes for a stable tone and intonation on the modern instrument. An open-lay mouthpiece made of boxwood and light reeds makes for a varied timbre, flexible tone, and intonation on the period instrument. Ergonomically the modern instrument is facilitated by keywork being adapted for finger placement. Ergonomically the period instrument is impeded by the position of tone holes for note placement. On the modern instrument playing in all keys is possible whilst on the period instrument many cross fingerings and special fingerings for intonation limit the keys it can play in. The modern instrument changes slower with regards to temperature because of the density of the material whilst the period instrument changes quicker leading to more unstable intonation as intonation and temperature are linked. Articulation on the modern instrument is generally flexible and non-dependent on the key it plays in. Articulation on the period instrument is based on the key it plays in and the use of the cross-fingerings native to the given key. The modern instrument is quite stable concerning the changing of the bore, tenon, and tone hole dimensions. The period instrument is more prone to changes with use as the material is more permeable.
I have identified some of the relationships between phrasing on a modern grenadilla instrument and a modern boxwood instrument:
The grenadilla instrument is denser and heavier whilst the boxwood instrument is more permeable and lighter in weight. The grenadilla instrument projects more whilst the boxwood instrument is mellower in timbre. The grenadilla instrument has a resistance that makes articulation a little slower in response whilst the boxwood instrument is quicker in response to articulation. The different overtones of the boxwood instrument make it easier to blend with other instruments. The density of the wood makes the grenadilla instrument slower in response to temperature change and thus intonation. The boxwood instrument changes quicker with temperature because of its density and thus intonation. The grenadilla instrument responds slower to dynamics because of its density whilst the less dense boxwood instrument responds quicker. The grenadilla instrument is a quite stable wood concerning the changing of the bore, tenon, and tone hole dimensions. The boxwood instrument is more prone to change as the material is more permeable.
What can affordance tell us about phrasing? Affordance is at the intersection of the performer and the performance. The understanding of these affordances can leeway a clearer conveyance of musical ideas.
Comparing a period instrument to a modern instrument it is clear that the different affordances described above lead to very different musical outcomes and expression. Although it is not an aim in itself to mimic a period instrument’s phrasing on a modern instrument, it can be noted that some musical expression can be lost in the modern instruments’ quest for evenness, stability, and conformity.
Comparing a modern grenadilla instrument to a modern boxwood instrument we can note that material has a certain impact that can perhaps facilitate certain aspects of phrasing such as articulation, blending, and dynamics. Whether or not these aspects add value to the performer and performance is a question for each musician, but being aware that these opportunities exist should be taken into consideration. Different repertoire, venues, and other contexts can play a role in determining what tools are required to give the best musical results for any given concert situation.
To have a musician transcend an instrument’s natural affordances and phrase from the intent of the music alone is a goal that many instrumentalists strive for. Having a greater understanding of your particular instrument of choice and how it invites you to make music will empower the performer and the performance to what all musicians aim for—shaping music.
REFERENCE LIST
Gibson J. J. “The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems” (1966)
Gibson J. J. “The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception” (1979)
[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/affordance
[2]Gibson J. J. “The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems” (1966)
[3]Gibson J. J. “The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception” p. 127 (1979)