Moving the mouse cursor over the top of the page will display the menu bar.
In ‘early music’ performance today ΄sound΄ does not get as much attention as other expressive devices, even though the sound was an inseparable part of expression in music performance in 18th century.
This research attempts to explore the traverso and its expressive sound possibilities when placed in the field of contemporary music. The tonal capabilities of the traverso will be viewed from the perspectives of both 18th century sources and modern-day ΄early΄ and ΄classical music practice΄. The research considers what have sometimes been seen as the instrument´s “limitations” and "imperfections", asking how they could be positively exploited in contemporary music. At the same time, so-called ‘extended techniques ’for the modern flute are explored on the baroque flute, by a study and performance of two contemporary compositions for traverso solo. At the end, I will be looking at how this untraditional perception of traverso sound could open up our expressive imagination in performance of the traditional 18th century traverso repertoire.
The research hopes to bring some new inspirations for traverso players as well as other ΄early music΄ performers, and to clarify the distinctive role of sound as an expressive device in early instruments. It also hopes to inspire composers to write more contemporary acoustic music using the specific sonority of this instrument. The presentation will be given in the form of performance-lecture.
Tip
This page contains media that is intended to start playback automatically on opening. This may include sound.
Your browser is blocking automated playback. Please
click here to start media.
Dorota Matejova -
The Limits of Traverso; Exploring the sound possibilities of traverso through contemporary music -
2020
In ‘early music’ performance today ΄sound΄ does not get as much attention as other expressive devices, even though the sound was an inseparable part of expression in music performance in 18th century.
This research attempts to explore the traverso and its expressive sound possibilities when placed in the field of contemporary music. The tonal capabilities of the traverso will be viewed from the perspectives of both 18th century sources and modern-day ΄early΄ and ΄classical music practice΄. The research considers what have sometimes been seen as the instrument´s “limitations” and "imperfections", asking how they could be positively exploited in contemporary music. At the same time, so-called ‘extended techniques ’for the modern flute are explored on the baroque flute, by a study and performance of two contemporary compositions for traverso solo. At the end, I will be looking at how this untraditional perception of traverso sound could open up our expressive imagination in performance of the traditional 18th century traverso repertoire.
The research hopes to bring some new inspirations for traverso players as well as other ΄early music΄ performers, and to clarify the distinctive role of sound as an expressive device in early instruments. It also hopes to inspire composers to write more contemporary acoustic music using the specific sonority of this instrument. The presentation will be given in the form of performance-lecture.
Dorota Matejova -
The Limits of Traverso; Exploring the sound possibilities of traverso through contemporary music -
2020
Exploring the sound possibilities of traverso through contemporary music
Photo credits: Martina Zuzana Šimkovičová
Format: Research exposition
Author: Dorota Matejová
Main subject: Traverso
Student nr.: 3210650
Date: 24th February 2020
Research supervisor: Kate Clark
Main subject teachers: Kate Clark, Wilbert Hazelzet
Presentation: 27th March 2020, 9:00 a.m., Studio 3, Royal Conservatoire The Hague
Introduction
My journey with the traverso ΄sound΄ has begun few years ago. At its
very beginning, there was me falling in love with the special sonority
of this instrument. The ΄sound΄ became my very first motivation to
explore and to learn to play the traverso.
To prevent any confusion or misunderstanding of terms, in this work I
will refer to ΄sound΄ as a term embracing timbre and tone colour, but
also dynamic variation and volume capacity of the instrument. Under
terms ΄traverso΄ and ΄one-keyed flute΄ I refer to the same instrument:
an instrument with a wooden conically shaped body in four parts[1] and
six finger-holes.
The instrument I am using to “experiment on” is a replica by Simon
Polak, made after the original instrument of a Dutch instrument builder
Willem Beukers from around 1735. The instrument is made from boxwood,
which has an influence on the tone colour and general volume of the
instrument. Its tuning is a´=415 Hz.
Besides my fascination with the ΄sound΄ of the one-keyed flute, another
reason why I have chosen this topic is that I feel that in ‘early music’
performance today ΄sound΄, as such, does not get as much attention as
other expressive devices (such as ornamentation, harmony,
rhetoric and its influence on the interpretation), even though the
΄sound΄ was an inseparable part of the expression in music performance
in 18th century. Here, we need another clarification of terms.
Under the term ‘early music’ performance we would usually understand a
performance of pre-Romantic music repertoire[2], which is usually
related to ‘historically informed practice’ (in short known as HIP). HIP
is tightly bounded up with the subject of “authenticity” – a practice
attempting to come as close as possible to a faithful interpretation of
18th century music (and music of earlier or later epochs).
However, in modern-day understanding, HIP can involve repertoire of any
epoch, when studied in its historical context. Studying repertoires of
younger historical epochs, namely Romantic, late Romantic or music from
the turn of the centuries, in context of HIP, is nowadays becoming quite
a common practice within the ΄early music΄. Therefore also the term
΄early music΄ is changing its original meaning, and nowadays can refer
to a study of a wider spectrum of repertoires.
I will refer to the ΄early music΄ performance (or study or practice) as
a term including any repertoire that is studied in the HIP context. What
HIP includes, and what is its historical background we will briefly
examine in the first chapter.
In order to understand the ΄sound΄ of the traverso, its established and
its unexplored sound possibilities as well as the various perceptions of
the traverso ΄sound΄, we need to first look at its ΄sound ideal΄. This
we will explore in the first chapter. In the second chapter, we will
look into perceived “limitations” of the instrument.
Further, this research attempts to explore the traverso and its
expressive sound possibilities when replaced from its usual context of
traditional repertoire into the field of contemporary music. It
considers what have been seen as the instrument´s “limitations” and
sometimes “imperfections”, asking how they could be positively
exploited in contemporary music.
The third chapter will explore the possible ΄sounds of the traverso΄ in
contemporary music through an examination of so-called ΄extended
techniques΄ which are a part of musical language of contemporary music
for woodwind instruments. This way I am hoping to find new textures and
tone colours, and expand my perception of dynamic possibilities of this
instrument.
My first encounter with contemporary music for traverso was few years
ago with a piece JMF for DM for traverso solo, that will be examined
in the fourth chapter together with another piece for traverso solo
Anspielungen by Hans-Martin Linde. Despite the fact, that the
΄traverso in contemporary music΄ is still fairly unexplored, there are a
number of new compositions written for traverso in different settings.
My research is placed into the context of work and discoveries by
pioneers in this field, such as traverso players Matteo Gemolo and Maja Miró.
At the same time, through the exploration of traverso sound
possibilities in contemporary music I hope to gain a different
perspective on expressive possibilities of the techniques used in the
traditional (18th century) traverso repertoire. In this context, what
΄extended techniques΄ on the one-keyed are, might be questioned. This
question will be a subject of the last chapter.
Through this work I am also hoping to expand my own expressivity and
question my own perspective of what an “ideal” traverso sound means. The
research hopes to bring some new inspirations for traverso players as
well as other ΄early music΄ performers, and to clarify the distinctive
role of ΄sound΄ as an expressive device in early instruments. It also
hopes to inspire composers to write more music using the specific
sonority of this instrument.
1. TRAVERSO: ΄SOUND IDEAL΄
In this chapter I will look closely at the problems of the baroque flute
΄sound ideal΄ from two perspectives: an 18th century perspective, and
a modern – 20th and 21st century perspectives.
We cannot separate the ΄sound ideal΄ from the characteristics of the
musical epoch, nor can we separate the ΄sound ideal΄ from developments
in music instruments and music aesthetic of a particular musical epoch.
This thought and my reasons to compare the traverso ΄sound ideal΄ in
18th century and in 20th and 21st century are well summarized in
the following quote by N. Harnoncourt:
“Delineating the distinct phases of development during each particular
historical period requires comprehensive technical knowledge, whose
consistent application is reflected in formal and structural aspects of
performance. However, it is the sound itself (tone color, character,
loudness of the instruments, etc.) which allows this distinction to be
clearly and immediately perceived. For just as the interpretation of
notation or the practice of improvisation underwent constant
modification in keeping with the Zeitgeist, changes were also taking
place in concepts of sound and in what constituted an ideal sound, and
thus also in the instruments themselves, the way in which they were
played, and even in vocal techniques.”[3]
As we will see in the following findings of this chapter, Harnoncourt´s
thought on the distinctive role of a music instrument´s ΄sound΄ in
forming the ΄sound ideal΄ and the performance style of a particular
historical period has a great relevance.
1.1 18th century perspectives
I shall begin by laying out some of the key opinions on a ΄sound ideal΄
in this time period by looking at several key texts written in this
period.
One of the treatises I will be referring to is the Essay of a method
for playing the flute traversiere[4] by J. J. Quantz[5], the first
complex and detailed treatise on flute playing and performance practice
within a broad musical context[6]. Therefore, it is a seminal text and
of great use in our understanding of the aesthetic of ΄sound ideals΄ for
traverso at this time.
From Quantz’ writing, we can see that sound was seen as a complex
term, referring to tone colour, as well as dynamic variation and
volume (force vs. weakness): “No less must good execution be varied.
Light and shadow must be constantly maintained. No listener will be
particularly moved by someone who always produces the notes with the
same force or weakness and, so to speak, plays always in the same
colour, or by someone who does not know how to raise or moderate the
tone at the proper time.”[7]
Thus, apart from the expected variety in all the aspects of the sound,
an essential element of the performance was the performer´s ability to
move the listener. This would happen through the
expression of passions[8] through the musical performance. Quantz
refers to the combination of all these elements as a “good execution”:
"…Execution is poor, if the intonation is untrue and the tone is
forced,… Execution is poor, if everything is sung or played on the
same level, with no alteration of Piano and Forte; if you contradict the
passions that should be expressed, or in general execute everything
without feeling, without sentiment, and without being moved
yourself,…"[9]
These two quotes complete each other: moving the listener through the
passions depended upon the “good execution” by the performer – who
himself should be moved[10]. It is therefore my belief that the ΄sound΄
of the flute has played a key role in executing the passions.
Charles De Lusse[11] compares the necessity of dynamic variation for
expression of melody to the variety in declamation by the voice:
"Both (piano and forte, note: author) are very necessary for
expressing the intention of the melody; that is to say that they produce
the same effect in music as produced in declamation, the sweetness and
the brightness of the voice; that which is in opposition to the monotone
into which one would undoubtedly otherwise fall. We usually mark these
with P and F, and when these letters are doubled, this augments the
power, or the sweetness by half."[12] Similarly to Quantz, De Lusse suggests here the complexity of understanding the sound: sound embraces volume, dynamic variation and
tone colour (“sweetness”, “power”), and these elements are
interdependent of each other.
In the 18th century the relation between the sound of music
instruments and the colour of human voice was appearing constantly. De
Lusse links the shape of the melody produced by an instrument to the
shape of declamation produced by the human voice (see his quote above).
Quantz links vocal technique and ‘colour’ to the sound of the flute:
"In general the most pleasing tone quality (sonus) on the flute is
that which more nearly resembles a contralto than a soprano, or which
imitates the chest tones of the human voice.[13]
Similarly, J. G. Tromlitz[14] in his A detailed and thorough
instruction on playing the flute[15] says that the “only model” for
instrumentalist´s ΄sound΄ should be a “beautiful voice” (see last part
of the quote):
“Since all people do not like the same kind of tone, but have
different tastes, a tone quality which can be recognized as beautiful by
everyone cannot be established. One will like a full, strong tone, not
bright and ringing, another will like a strong and crying sound; still
another will prefer a thin, pointed, and biting sound; a fourth will
like a thin, faint tone, etc. … This demonstrates that tone quality
is a matter of taste. I have often found that a tone held to be quite
beautiful by one, cannot be tolerated by another. Therefore it is
difficult, if not impossible, to define a beautiful sound for everyone
exactly. I say that the only model upon which an instrumentalist must
build his tone is a beautiful singing voice, and in my opinion, a
beautiful voice is one which is bright, full, and ringing - intense, but
not shrill, gentle, but not stuffy - in short, the voice that is
beautiful to me is full, singing, smooth, and supple.” [16]
The first part of the quote includes another key view on this period´s
aesthetic of the sound: the sound was a matter of taste. For
Tromlitz, a beautiful sound was such that is full, intense, bright,
ringing. Interestingly, Quantz describes a very similar preference for
a traverso sound: "You must strive as much as possible to acquire the
tone quality of those flute players who know how to produce a clear,
penetrating, thick, round, masculine, and withal pleasing sound from
the instrument."[17]
Both Quantz and Tromlitz agree that much of performer´s tone quality
depends a lot on the flute itself, and that sound is individual:every person has a different sound and tone quality, even if they
play on the very same instrument. Quantz compares the quality of the
flute to the natural quality of the voice – "no singer can make a poor
natural voice beautiful."[18] Tromlitz complements Quantz´s quotation
when he writes: "… If the instrumentalist has a bad tone, however,
he is to blame, for a good sound is dependent primarily upon his skill,
however much depends also on the instrument. A bad instrument cannot
produce a good sound."[19]
Here we can see that despite the importance of a good quality
instrument, the “good sound” depended primarily upon the performer´s
skills. At the beginning of the century, Hotteterre[20] puts the same
opinion in other words: "… some people have a natural ability for
playing this instrument; and for them only the knowledge of the
principles is lacking."[21]
What is important to note now, is that the ΄sound ideal΄ of the
traverso had been changing already throughout the 18th century. This
had to do a lot with the changes in the flute´s construction which comes
hand in hand with the changing performance style, just like
Harnoncourt´s quote tells us at the beginning of this chapter.
A treatise by Hotteterre from the beginning of the century (1707) is in
comparison to the treatises by Quantz (1752) and Tromlitz (1791) fairly
short, and does not say anything specific about the traverso ΄sound΄.
The treatise includes detailed descriptions of fingerings and technical
executions of each tone. In my understanding, the author explains these
in such details due to the importance of forming an individual tone
colour of each tone on the one-keyed flute. This notion is also
mentioned in the edition´s introduction by David Lasocki: “…
(speaking about the “new” Hotteterre flute model) the intonation was
much better, if still difficult, and that the tone was more colourful.
… the cross-fingered notes have a different tone quality from
others… This gives most passages a completely different “shape” to
that given by them by a modern Böhm flute.”[22]
Until the middle of the century, this approach emphasizing the
individuality of different colours of single tones continued (Quantz, De
Lusse). By the end of the century, as is obvious from the writings of
Tromlitz´s treatise (1791), many of the principles of the sound and
performance style remained the same. However, the traverso ΄sound ideal΄
had taken on few changes. What is now seen as a marker of quality in the
flute sound is the evenness of the tone throughout all registers.
Tromlitz writes this evenness was not easy to achieve: "He who has a
bright full sound throughout the whole instrument has many advantages
over the others who do not have it, but many do not have such a
sound."[23]
At the time of Tromlitz´s treatise, more and more keys were being added
to the flute facilitating this greater evenness. The sound ideal of the
evenness of the tone has its root in this constructional change. J. D.
Boland summarizes it like this: "By the end of the eighteenth century
the concept of a consistent colour throughout the chromatic range was
taking hold. Flute construction minimized the differences between the
notes, and cross-fingered notes came under harsh criticism. This
criticism seems to have occurred about the same time as keys were being
added to the flute, which eliminated the distinctive sounds produced
by cross-fingered notes."[24]
In summary, from the writings we have in the 18th century we can make
the following assumptions about a ΄traverso sound ideal΄ present during
this period. Firstly that ΄sound΄ was used as an expression of the
passions; secondly that this was highly linked with the colour and
expressivity of the human voice; thirdly that the ΄sound ideal΄ was both
highly subjective (Tromlitz: “sound is a matter of taste”) and changing
throughout this period; and lastly that it seems the sound that was
preferred was one that is round/full, thick/intense, clear/bright,
penetrating/ ringing, masculine, pleasing/beautiful (Quantz/Tromlitz).
Other findings of note are that the sound´s colour, dynamic level and
volume must be varied throughout a performance in order to achieve a
“good execution” and to move the listener; and that a ΄sound colour΄ and
tone quality is individual by each performer.
1.2 Modern perspectives on traverso sound
Attempting to look at the traverso ΄sound ideal΄ from modern-day
perspective, it is tempting to take one of two different established
perspectives: an ΄early music΄ perspective or a broader ΄classical
music΄[25] perspective. The first implies trying to look from the past
to the present; the second implies looking from the present to the past.
Both perspectives are very complex and have their own historical
background and context. Therefore, I would like to briefly look into the
history of what has come to be called ΄historically informed practice΄
(HIP) or ΄early music΄ study, and examine three performing styles that,
according to B. Haynes, we know in 20th and 21st century. In my
opinion, these three styles have an influence on forming modern-day
΄sound ideal΄ of the one-keyed flute.
1.2.1 A brief history of HIP and its performing styles
As we have already outlined in the Introduction, the HIP movement
advocates a performing style studied and executed in its historical
context, reviving historical repertoires, and performance on period
(historical) instruments.According to Haynes, there were two waves of HIP in 20th century,
both advocating the idea of reviving historical repertoires but
differing in their approach to performance of these repertoires.
The first HIP “revolution” happened at the turn of 19th and 20th
centuries, and was represented by such musicians as Arnold Dolmetsch,
Violet Gordon Woodhouse and Wanda Landowska[26]. If we listen to the
recordings of Landowska and Gordon-Woodhouse, we can clearly hear that
their performing style and ΄sound΄ is different from most of modern-day
΄early music΄ performances. Based on the context of that period, their
performing style was highly influenced by, what Haynes calls, a
“Romantic style”, a main performing style of this period, characterized by high expressivity,
including lots of portamentos, rhythmical freedom, fluctuating tempos
and “unrelenting earnestness”. Nowadays, we can hear it only on early
recordings[27].
The second “revolution” of HIP movement emerged in 1960s, as an
opposition to, what Haynes calls, a “Modern style”. This style had
developed as a gradual “mutation” of the Romantic style after the World
War I, as Haynes explains, until it had reached its today´s form. The
Modern style is characterized by accuracy, literal interpretation of the
scores, and often “tightfisted with personal expression.”[28] As a
reaction of the second wave of HIP against this Modern style, a third
style developed – a “Period style”. This Period style, reviving
performance of historical repertoires on historical instruments was,
according to Haynes, characterized by literacy, replication and “exact”
interpretation of historical repertoire.
The performing style of both HIP movements is inseparable from the
influence of main styles occurring in their periods: the influence of
Romantic style on the first HIP movement, and the influence of Modern
style on the second HIP movement. The Period style exists in within
΄early music΄ education and performance until today, although nowadays,
there is more variety of approaches within ΄early music΄ education.
However the changes in performing styles during the 20th century
influence the modern-day ΄sound ideal΄ of early music instruments, even
though the times might be changing, and even though as ΄early music΄
students we might not be fully aware of this influence.
1.2.2. ΄Early music΄ and ΄classical music΄ perspective of the traverso
΄sound ideal΄
Looking at the traverso ΄sound ideal΄ from the perspective of modern-day
΄early music΄ performance, we could see that this practice is constantly
influenced by the times we are living in, and today may be different
from what it was thirty or fifty years ago. I have chosen opinions on
flute ΄sound΄ of some important ΄early music΄ performers and specialists
of the second half of 20th century. All of them represent different
generation of ΄early music΄ performers, and they examine the flute´s
΄sound΄ from the perspective of historical sources.
In his introduction[29] to Die Flöte in der “Allgemeine Musikalische
Zeitung”[30] Frans Vester[31] writes: “The most salient feature of
today’s flute playing is uniformity. On the surface, the different
conceptions may differ, but there is hardly any profound difference of
opinion.”[32] Vester further points out that the terms “phrasing” and
“articulation” have lost their original meaning, and that “stylistic
differences exist only in the imagination.” He criticizes the fact that
the demonstration of performer´s technical abilities became more
important than the “music itself” – unlike it was at the end of the
18th century, in the time of AMZ, when the “uniformity of style” as we
experience it today was unknown. Although referring most probably to
modern flute practice in his time, Vester´s opinion is relevant for us
since he was one of the first performer´s on historical flutes at the
time, and he belongs to the second generation of HIP´s movement emerging
in 1960s.
Barthold Kuijken[33] gives a more specific opinion on some aspects of
sound of ΄early music΄ performance in his writings[34]. He points out
to the 18th century´s principle of a singing voice being a model for
instrumentalist´s articulation, phrasing or dynamics. About the use of
dynamics, he says: “… Clearly differentiated micro-dynamics, valid
for a very small group of notes were predominant.”[35] According to
Kuijken this micro-dynamics is related to “good” and “bad” notes,
hierarchy of beats in the bar, dynamics in regards to articulation (e.g.
diminuendo at the end of a slur), intervals (ascending or descending),
and harmony (dissonant, resolutions). He finds the use of micro-dynamics
more important than the macro-dynamics: “When micro-dynamics are
omnipresent… macro-dynamics extending over longer passages, cannot be
very important.”[36] He writes that together with this preference for
dynamic variation on a smaller scale (mostly within a bar), there was a
preference for a more delicate and fine way of playing, and that towards the end
of 18th century, a louder and more even sound would be preferred,
appearing together with the development of the instruments. Kuijken is of an
opinion that this evolution of the instruments does not necessarily come
as their improvement: "… instruments may gain in evenness and
volume – but might at the same time lose variety of colours and
delicacy."[37]
We can find a completely different perspective on the 18th century
΄sound ideal΄ in regards to volume and dynamics in an article ΄Sonority
in 18th century, un poco più forte?΄ by J. Wentz and W. Kroesberger.
Similarly to B. Kuijken, author´s opinion is strongly rooted in sources.
However, here the sources offer a completely different perspective: the
sound which was preferred and considered beautiful is such sound that is
loud and strong. Author quotes Quantz with “his taste for a strong
flute tone”, and explains that flute players made use of an imitation
of the strongest register of the organ – Prestant, known as
Principalton[38]. Even with the changing taste in performance
practice and thus ΄sound ideal΄ by the end of the century, “flautists
continued to strive for a healthy, firm, full, and masculine tone.”
Here author´s opinion we can link to Tromlitz´s preference for such
sound. Authors explain the 18th century preference for the strong
sound, among other quotations, like this: “Crousaz proposed that humans
were born to be moved – “affected” in the 18th century sense of the
word. To this can be attributed their preference for the strongest
sensual impressions, as long as they were not physically painful.”[39]
Therefore the preference for a long and strong sound is directly linked
with the expressions of the passions. We have already seen the
connection between the passions and their expression through instrument´s sound in music
performance earlier in this chapter, in quotes by Quantz.
In summary, the modern perspectives on 18th century ΄sound ideal΄ from
a perspective of ΄early music performance practice΄ rely highly on
exploration of the period sources. As we could see only from the
opinions of the three quoted authors, who represent different
generations of ΄early music΄ practice, the understanding and
interpretation of the sources can be very different, and that is for, in
my opinion, two reasons. Firstly, we might become selective (if
consciously or unconsciously) in what we take from the sources based on
what we find relevant for our own interpretation of ΄early music΄, or
what we believe about it. Secondly, our understanding of the sources
will always be to some degree influenced by the times we live in and the
current circumstances in ΄early music΄. Therefore, even if we all study
sources and we all play historical instruments, our opinions on ΄sound
ideal΄ may be different. Perhaps here we can find a parallel with the
18th century´s opinion on ΄sound ideal΄: what is beautiful cannot be
established (Tromlitz), because everyone considers beautiful a different
sound, everyone has a different “taste”.
Looking from a perspective of ΄classical music΄, the one-keyed flute
might be considered an “imperfect” predecessor of today´s modern flute:
much softer in sound, “less well in tune”, a smaller range, etc. This
perspective might influence our ΄sound ideal΄ of the one-keyed flute -
if comparing its sound capabilities to modern flute and to the
prevailing sound in ΄classical music΄ nowadays – uniform in timbre,
homogenous, loud, even through all registers. But I do not want to
criticize here the sound in ΄classical music΄. I would just like to
point out the influence it might have on forming of our ΄sound ideal΄ in
general. Because we cannot separate ourselves from the times we live in,
the aesthetics of the Modern style - including a specific ΄sound ideal΄,
might also influence us to a certain degree, whether we realize it or
not.
In my opinion, what is important is to look for the essence of the
sound rather than a copy or an imitation based on literal understanding
(or misunderstanding) of given information, which can be a danger when
studying the historical sources. To search for this essence, we must
experiment with the instrument itself, exploring its
materiality and all its capacities, in order to find its limits, its
volume capacity, and its colours. In the next chapters we will
experiment with the traverso sound in the field of contemporary music.
The word “experimentation” is important here. A real experimentation
with the sound happens outside set rules and outside the established
΄sound ideal΄ of a given period.
2. TRAVERSO: LIMITATIONS AND CONTEMPORARY MUSIC
In this chapter the ΄sound ideal΄ of the one-keyed flute will be
revisited from the perspective of contemporary music in order to find
the “real” possibilities and limitations of the instrument, free of any
established ΄sound ideal΄ that we have explored in the first chapter.
The “limitations of the traverso” coming into whole new context, now
disappear, and they become a vehicle for performing new music on an old
(historical) instrument. Before we start this exploration and
experimentation, let´s look what are the considered “limitations” of the
one-keyed flute nowadays.
2.1 Limitations of the traverso for the performance of 18th century music, from the 21st century perspective
As has already been suggested, from the modern perspective of 18th
century performance practice, there are some perceived limitations in
the sound of the baroque flute. Even highly competent professional
performers of the traverso today often seem to feel they have to veil or
compensate for innate “weaknesses” in the instrument. I have collected
the most frequently occurring aspects of “traverso limits” below.
2.1.1 Volume
Nowadays, the baroque flute is often seen as a “soft” instrument that is
problematic for balance in small and large ensembles. The softness is
considered a negative quality.
2.1.2 Dynamics
There are several limitations perceived with the dynamic range of the
instrument, these are:
(i) the small volume tends to discourage playing really softly (pp and
ppp dynamics) - for fear of being inaudible,
(ii) the louder end of the flute’s dynamic range is sometimes
underutilised - for fear of the sound becoming ugly or forced,
(iii) the actual difference between pianissimo and fortissimo on the
traverso is considered quite small.
To maximise the difference we rely on contrast. To achieve this we need
to be in smaller ensembles or alone, and in a room that supports the
piano with resonance. Playing in larger ensembles or rooms, we tend to
cut out the lower end of the dynamic range and/or push the louder sound,
compromising its quality.
In 18th century, Tromlitz´s advice for keeping a clearly audible
difference between piano and forte on the traverso is in having a
“good” sound as a basis: "…You need only to take care to obtain a
healthy, firm, full, intense, and supple tone of such strength that you
can still always produce a piano or forte,
…"[40]
2.1.3 Range
The acute register (above e’’’) is often experienced as difficult,
limiting the useful range of the flute to even less than 2.5 octaves. In
Hotteterre´s time the tones above e’’’ were not often in use as well, he
says: “The notes above e´´´ are forced notes, and cannot enter
naturally in any piece.”[41] He says however, these notes are used
sometimes, but only advanced flutists should use them. Going further in
the 18th century, the third octave was used more frequently, often in
virtuoso pieces, like in Capriccios[42] by Quantz, or Etudes[43] by De
Lusse.
2.1.4 Uneven registers
The strength of low and high register being uneven was also considered
problematic, especially at the end of the 18th century. Tromlitz writes:
"…It is indeed true that the high tones of the flute are much more
penetrating than the low tones, and thus it is important that the lower
tones be produced with more force, but this stronger and weaker
production must not be exaggerated on either side, otherwise you will
always encounter the aforementioned mistake. An educated and
correctly-attuned ear can easily decide how much weaker the high notes
must be played in order to retain the same sound quality as the lower
octave. "[44]
The “correct” strength in low as well as high register is to be achieved
by the combination of angle of blowing, speed of the airstream and the
correct position of the lips. This should be achieved not only in
volume, but also in the quality of the sound – something we find
difficult today as well.
2.1.5 Fork fingerings (cross-fingerings) and “good” notes vs. “bad”
notes
This aspect is connected with the “unevenness” mentioned above - the
unevenness of volume and of colour of single tones,
especially the cross-fingered tones can be experienced as a handicap, as
soon as the goal is uniformity of colour and/or intensity. Many flats
and a “soft key” bring up the general problem of volume and dynamic.
At the end of the 18th century Tromlitz writes: “Many also believe
it is not possible to make the tones which are by nature dull on the
flute, as bright as the other tones, but much is possible if the flute,
the embouchure, and the ear are good. … in the upper register there
is more evenness by nature, and it is therefore much easier to retain
quality.”[45]
The changing ideal in Tromlitz´s time influenced his view, however, the
goal of 18th century flute playing was to find variety in colour, it
was considered natural that different tones have different colour.
Therefore this “uneven” colour of single tones was not seen as a
handicap, especially in the first half of the 18th century, these
different colours were sought-after. We can understand this, for
example, from the mentioned Hotteterre´s treatise, where he gives an
importance to explaining in a great technical detail the execution of
each pitch on the flute.
2.1.6 Tuning
There can be a tension between the inherent tuning of the flute and the
“compromised” temperaments used nowadays by keyboards and lutes.
The traverso seems to be designed to make pure intervals, as we can read
in Hottettere, or Tromlitz: "…you must take care to learn to retain
evenness between high and low also, so that not just the high register
alone (has good quality) while the lower register does not match at all,
as often happens. … as a result not only the evenness between high
and low, but also the purity of the intervals, even on a well-voiced
instrument, is lost."[46]
Another fact is, that most of the original models of the one-keyed
18th century flutes are in various tunings ranging from a´=392 Hz to
approximately a´=415 Hz, most of them built in around a´= 400 Hz, where the
flute is said to sound its best. Since today´s tuning pitch in early
music is a “compromised” a´= 415 Hz, most of today´s replicas are
“adjusted” to this pitch, therefore their sound and tuning is
compromised as well.
2.1.7 Conclusions
As a result of these established stereotypes, we have to make
compromises all the time, mostly in chamber music settings. I have
observed that often instead of “expanding” or breaking through “the
limitations of the traverso” by experimenting with them, we simply
accept them as unchangeable and act upon them, compromising hugely our
performance practice. The expression of music suffers from this approach
the most. Because the sound of the baroque flute is like our voice, and
we are often not searching for the possibilities of “our voice”, beyond
what has been already established.
We will now view the ΄sound ideal΄ from a third perspective – from a
perspective of contemporary music. I believe that the environment of
contemporary music can allow us to explore and experiment with the
instrument beyond the established ΄classical music΄ or ΄early music΄
΄sound ideals΄.
2.2. ΄Sound ideal΄ from the perspective of contemporary music
Sound has its very own place in contemporary music[47]. It is not
primarily about beauty and homogeneity. It includes a richer and more
diverse understanding compared to the understanding we usually get
through ΄classical music΄ education or ΄early music΄ education. The
΄sound΄ in contemporary music has a meaning in all its possible forms.
Here the ΄sound ideal΄ had completely freed itself from any tonal base,
and from everything that had been considered “beautiful” until the
beginning of the 20th century. This perspective has its historical
background.
As H. Russcol explains[48], until the beginning of 1900, everything in
tonal music was said and explored and tried; tonality reached its end
line. One of the evidences for this is that the traditional instruments
stopped their evolution around the middle of 19th century, because the
instrument makers were no longer challenged by the discoveries of
composers[49]. In 1907, F. Busoni published a book Sketch of a New
Aesthetic of Music, a first writing embracing revolutionary ideas on
music and its changing aesthetic, dissolving of the traditional form and
departing from the traditional tonal system towards the “era of sound”.
The gradual decomposition of tonal system that had started in the second
half of 19th century, continued shortly after 1900 by “the great
revolutionaries” (Satie, Stravinsky, Schönberg, Skrijabin, Ives) and
Webern and Varèse, who were pivotal figures “in the shift from the
harmonic age to the age of sound”[50]. After the World War II, there
was a second wave of a big shift in music aesthetic. The battles between
tonality and atonality were done, and composers Xenakis, Stockhausen,
Boulez, and Cage embraced the new music that knew no limits, boundaries,
or categories.
It is interesting to note, that at the same time when this “age of
sound” in contemporary music was emerging - in 1950s, the Modern style
in ΄classical music΄ world was fully in. One decade later, the second
wave of HIP movement started to emerge and the Period style was shaped.
In the time when the great experiments of contemporary music were
starting, the ΄classical music΄ world saw its complete abandoning of
high expressivity of Romantic style, and ΄early music΄ world with its
Period style was taking shape and step by step getting its way to the
formal education in music schools.
2.3 Extended techniques, expanding the sonority of woodwinds
In 1960s, Bruno Bartolozzi, started to experiment with the sound
possibilities of woodwind instruments. In his revolutionary book New
sounds for Woodwinds, he presents many concepts for developing new
sonorities and techniques for woodwind group. He examines the relation
between the historical development of woodwind instruments, their sound
possibilities and today´s ΄sound ideal΄. He says that full sound
possibilities of the instrument are not primarily limited by its
technical possibilities or limitations, but by the fact, that the
efforts of instrument makers and performers “have been concentrated on
a single objective - the emission of single sounds of maximum timbric
homogeneity throughout the range of instruments. The objective has
therefore been not one of exploiting the characteristic possibilities of
each instrument but of satisfying the musical requirements of each
successive epoch.”[51]
As he explains, the “untraditional” techniques had always existed - they
had existed before they were actually “discovered”, but they had not
been used due to the aesthetic requirements (or ΄sound ideals΄) of the
past epochs. The instruments had been developing to be “improved”, but
their “improvement” is strongly determined by requirements in
performance practice and music aesthetic of a given time.
According to Harnoncourt, these “improvements” have their “shadow” side
too. He implies that each improvement of the instrument “sacrifices” a
different aspect of the instrument: “I both see and hear that each
instrument, by the time it is used in art music, has already reached an
optimal stage where overall improvements are no longer possible. Any
improvement in one area must therefore be paid for by a worsening in a
different area. This is a hypothesis which I have found consistently
confirmed in innumerable experiments and in constant dealing with this
material, so that it has begun to assume for me the character of a
demonstrated fact.”[52] We could see this observation of Harnoncourt
in the development of the traverso in 18th century. As more keys were
added to the flute, it was gaining on evenness and clarity of sound, but
it had lost its original colourfulness of single tones.
Bartolozzi further explains that the playing technique of woodwind
instruments was standardized too in order to meet the criteria of
maximum timbric unity and “good” intonation, and this resulted in an
unvaried standard type of performing techniques[53]. From the 20th
century perspective, Bartolozzi was among the first ones, who “broke
through” this traditional playing technique, and started to develop
so-called ΄extended techniques΄ for woodwind instruments.
The ΄extended techniques΄ are known as techniques used in contemporary
music, expanding instrument´s sound possibilities beyond the limits of
the traditional – in this case, flute repertoire. They are like a
language of contemporary flute music.
In 1980s, the ΄extended techniques΄ were further explored by Robert
Dick. His book[54] focuses on these techniques in great detail and its
purpose is to explore all possible capabilities of the flute “as a
sound-producing instrument”. We will explore the ΄extended techniques΄
and look into R. Dick´s book in the third chapter.
2.4 The Traverso in Contemporary Music
Today´s traverso players such as Maja Miró Wiśniewska and Matteo Gemolo
are among those who devote themselves to the performance of contemporary
repertoire for traverso as well as exploration of the non-traditional
traverso techniques. Gemolo, one of today´s pioneers of ΄extended
techniques΄ on the one-keyed flute, writes about the sound possibilities
of traverso in these words: “Notably, the traverso offers an incredibly
new soundscape, thanks to its rich palette of timbres and sound
possibilities and its flexibility in producing microtones and embracing
other extended techniques.”[55]
Since 1980s the traverso and other early music instruments started to be
regularly employed in contemporary music compositions[56], resulting in
some innovative ways of using these instruments. Matteo Gemolo explains
the modern-day growing interest of composers to employ traverso in their
compositions like this: "…Within the contemporary music scene, the
new composers’ tendency and need to distance themselves from the strict
rules of post-serialism and free their voices from any orthodox approach
to music seems to find in the traverso sound and its Baroque legacy the
best way of reconnecting the contemporary ‘effects’ with the perennial
‘affects’ that this instrument is able to evoke. "[57] Up until today
there are around 150 contemporary music compositions written for the
traverso in various settings: as a solo instrument, solo with
electronics, and traverso in various chamber music settings.
3. EXTENDED TECHNIQUES FOR THE ONE-KEYED FLUTE
Here we will take the traverso “out of its comfort zone” of its
traditional playing technique. What will be the focus of this chapter is
a close examination of the ΄extended techniques΄ when applied on the
baroque flute, since their study is fundamental for performance of
contemporary music.
The following list is supported by the list of ´extended techniques´ for
the modern flute described in Robert Dick´s book THE OTHER FLUTE, a
performance manual of contemporary techniques. This list is re-examined
and adjusted to create a selection of extended techniques which can be
produced on the one-keyed flute.
Some of the most specific and sought-after ´extended techniques´ are
described in articles of Matteo Gemolo. Perhaps surprisingly, the
execution of many of the ´extended techniques´ is also supported by some
18th century sources: apart from all the elements of the “traditional”
traverso technique, the information from these treatises can be very
well used in execution of many extended techniques played on the
traverso. As we will see, some of what is nowadays considered as an
“extended technique” was in the 18th century considered a part of a
common practice. And lastly, the executions of some ´extended techniques´
are explained as based on my own experimenting with them.
The ´extended techniques´ below are divided into three big categories –
“single sounds”, “multiple sounds” and “other sonorities”, following the
example of R. Dick´s book. The “single sounds” stand for techniques
producing only one sound at a time, the “multiple sounds” stand for
techniques producing two or more than two sounds at a time, and “other
sonorities” include techniques that produce sounds rather different than
of a “melodically-based” character.
3.1 SINGLE SOUNDS
3.1.1 TONE COLOURATION
In Dick´s book “tone colouration” is included among extended techniques.
As we could see in previous chapters, tone colouration has an important
place in the realm of 18th century traverso music. However, in 18th
century music we talk about tone coloration mainly from the perspective
of different colours of different tonalities and the colours of
different fingerings (alternative fingerings) of the one-keyed flute.
In the realm of contemporary music and its broad perception of sound, we
can vary the tone´s colour in several different ways. Among the ´extended
techniques´ that are responsible for tone coloration, we include: Natural
Harmonics, Alternative Fingerings and Embouchure Control.
3.1.1.1 Natural Harmonics
According to Robert Dick, “natural harmonics are the simplest of all
ways to vary the flute tone´s quality.”[58] They are produced by
over-blowing of regular fingerings. The fingering of the fundamental
tone very much influences the timbre of the harmonics. Together with the
given pitch of the harmonics, a residual tone[59] is often heard
along with the given pitch of the harmonics.
Charles De Lusse dedicates a whole chapter to « the harmonic sounds ».
He explains:
"The harmonic sounds are produced successively by the gradation of air
that one provides in the flute, without moving any fingers… To
understand these different successions, take for example, the Re, the
first generated sound; it produces re in its octave, la in its
second, re in its fourth (or double octave), fa in its seventeenth,
and la in its nineteenth. It is the same in regard to other
generated sounds, in that one must be observing always the position of
the fingers, conforming to the preceding ranges, and furthermore paying
close attention, so that one can make the most accurate sound of the
harmonics."[60]
He gives the following table[61] of the notation of harmonics
successions:
What is worth noticing in this table are the resulting harmonics on
D#´, F#´ and C#´´. Let´s take the D#´ as an example. The resulting
harmonic tones should be: an octave - D#´´, after a fifth - A#´´ and
again D#´´´. However, De Lusse writes E♭´´, B♭´´ and E♭´´´. Similarly
he writes the resulting harmonic tones of F#´ and C#´´ not as sharps,
but as flats. As we will see in Alternative Fingerings, these produced
harmonics on D#´ are not just “enharmonic tones” of D#´´ (enharmonic
would be E♭´´) and A#´´ (enharmonic would be B♭´´) like from a
modern-day perspective we could assume. On the one-keyed flute, these
“enharmonic” pitches sound slightly different, and therefore stand for
different tones. If De Lusse wrote them specifically as flats, it has a
meaning. We can assume it means that the harmonics on D#´ (and F#´ and
C#´´) sound slightly higher in pitch in relation to its fundamental, or
that he used the flats-notation to point out the different tone colours
of sounding harmonics if compared to its equivalent fingered pitch.
However, why did De Lusse mention using the harmonic tones in the first
place? What was his reason to mention them – or perhaps even to insist
on using them? Was it for tuning reasons, or for reasons of different
colours? We are not sure about his reasons. But assuming from his
description of the existing “harmonic sounds” and the table, we know
that already in 18th century, they knew about the execution of
harmonic series on the one-keyed flute, as well as the different pitch
colours these ΄harmonic sounds΄ produce.
The range of a wind instrument influences the range of the natural
harmonics, more precisely: the degree to which we can over-blow the
natural harmonics of a given pitch. The range of the one-keyed flute is
relatively limited – in most cases two and a half octaves (d1 – a3) –
therefore the range possibility of natural harmonics is not very broad,
as we can also see from De Lusse´s table.
Following De Lusse´s example, I experimented with playing the harmonic
series on the first six tones of the traverso. In the table[62] below,
my results are described. The harmonics were played on three different
instruments[63]. The nature and character of an individual instrument
influences the sound and difficulty or ease of executing the harmonics
series. Therefore the results may vary from instrument to instrument.
Based on this experiment, my conclusion is that the best sounding and
most “in tune” harmonics on the one-keyed flute are those arising from
the low D, and low E♭/D# since these two lowest pitches “embrace”
almost the full range of the traverso. Above G´ it is hardly possible to
produce natural harmonics higher than the first one in the harmonic
series, in other words just a regular over-blowing to the octaves. This
is due to the range of the one-keyed flute that does not allow enough
“space” for higher harmonics. There might be several reasons why on some
fundamentals “wrong” harmonics are sounding: 1. the influence of fork
fingerings of fundamentals, like E´, F´ and F#´, on resulting
harmonics; 2. the influence of how a particular model of the traverso is
built[64].
Both from De Lusse´s table and my experimentation, we can conclude that
the harmonic notes have their very specific colour. For example, the
tone A´´ as a harmonic tone of D´ has a more airy and subtle, perhaps
sweeter colour than a regular A´´ fingering. As R. Dick explains, this
specific colour of harmonic tones can be used in contemporary music, for
example, for echo effects or extremely soft fade-outs on high notes.
3.1.1.2 Alternative Fingerings
Unlike on the modern flute, alternative fingerings are a common practice
on the one-keyed flute. But like on the modern flute, nowadays they are
mostly used only for technical reasons such as in technically difficult
passages, for trills or for intonation reasons. Performers rarely choose
them for reasons of having a different tone colour on a particular pitch
or passage.
All the mentioned 18th century and other[65] flute treatises explain
the alternative fingerings, some briefly giving a table with fingerings
(like De Lusse); some in more detail (like Hotteterre or Quantz). I will
not explain all the “normal” alternative fingerings available on the
traverso, for these can be easily found in the mentioned 18th century
flute treatises. Instead, based on differences in sound and function, I
have divided alternative fingerings into two categories:
1. Multiple fingerings for the same pitch
These are alternative fingerings that are used for the same sounding
pitch, used mostly for tuning reasons, often in high notes. We can also
choose them for reasons of different colour, or for softer dynamics.
Examples: there are alternative fingerings for C´´´ -
often used for tuning reasons. In highest notes like F-sharp ´´´ or G´´´
there could be an alternative fingering used when these notes are played
in piano for sound and tuning reasons.
2. “Enharmonic” tones
Within the paradigm of equal temperament that divided the octave into
twelve equidistant semitones, an arrangement that became more prevalent
from the late nineteeth century on, the term “enharmonic” denoted notes
of exactly the same pitch that nevertheless bore two different names,
for example, Ab and G#, Bb and A# etc. By contrast, (as is well-known)
in the paradigm of 18th century music, with its different
temperaments, that acknowledged the impossibility of achieving pure
tuning of all intervals consistently with a perfect octave, the notes Ab
and G# represented two different pitches and corresponded to the
different melodic and harmonic contexts in which each would appear.
Eighteenth century traversos (among other instruments) were designed to
be able to produce these slightly different pitches, whether by
different fingerings, or by manipulation of the embouchure. This was
crucial, not only for accurate tuning, but also for the sense of the
appropriate ‘colour’ and musical expression of notes in whatever
context.
2 a. Two different fingerings and two different sounding pitches:
[Example:]{.underline} F# and G♭ are two different fingerings on the
one-keyed flute, in both first and second octaves. The first pitch
sounds slightly lower than the second one, just as it „should",
reflecting the different harmonic contexts in which this note will
appear. In the same way, different fingerings exist to distinguish the
following notes from each other: G# and A♭, A# and B♭, B# and C.
Different fingerings for C# and Db exist in the second octave only,
(simply due to the limited number of holes on the traverso).
2 b. Same fingering and a differently “coloured” pitch:
Example: for D# / E ♭ on the traverso we use the same fingering in all
three octaves, but depending on the scale in which we are playing (for
example D# in E major or E ♭ in F minor), we “place” the mentioned
pitch in differently. By this “placement” I mean a specific tuning but
also colour of the given pitch. This is difficult to exactly measure.
Based on my experience, this is a skill requiring some practice, careful
listening and a certain amount of experimenting. It is essential for the
“art of traverso playing”. Without it, mastery of the necessary finesse
of tuning and sound colour would be impossible.
3.1.1.3 Embouchure control
No less than for the traditional repertoire, embouchure control is
essential for performing contemporary repertoire, because it can greatly
influence changes in dynamics, pitch, and timbre.
Robert Dick describes four parameters included in embouchure control. He
says: “The four parameters are, of course, closely interdependent, and
control over all of them is necessary to make adjustments freely and
sensitively in dynamics, pitch and timbre.”[66] These parameters are
all equally applicable on the traverso, and they are:
Angle of the flute[67] is important for the direction of the
airstream into the flute. It affects primarily pitch and tone quality.
Airstream directed more into the flute produces more a brilliant and
thinner sound. Airstream directed more outwards produces more airy, but
thicker sound. The whisper tones are produced by blowing gently and
turning the flute beyond the normal playing angle.
Lip opening[68] focuses or de-focuses the air stream and is
responsible for control of over-blowing as well as for control of
dynamics and timbre. Wider opening produces less focused, more airy and
louder sound, and has more residual tones. Smaller opening produces less
volume and focused sound with reduced noise and reduced residual tones.
Lip position[69] and its function are described by R. Dick like
this: “Basically, the effect of the lip position is similar to the
coarse focus on a microscope or camera.”[70] This is therefore not
only a fixed lip position, but also a lip movement. Similarly, the lip
movement and its influence on the change of timbre is described by
Quantz: “On the flute the tone is formed by the movement of the lips,
in accordance with the degree to which they are contracted during the
exhalation of the air into the mouth hole of the flute. The mouth and
its parts, however, may also modify the tone in many ways.”[71]
3.1.2 MICROTONES
Gemolo explains that from the perspective of their function the
microtones on the one-keyed flute can be produced in two different ways.
First one is conceived “as an addition to the equal-tempered chromatic
scale”; second one “as a means of redefining musical intervals within
the search for a better approximation than that delivered by the twelve
tones equal temperament”[72]. Based on my experimentation, on the
one-keyed flute we can produce microtones in three ways:
by covering the mouth-hole to varying degrees by the movement of the
lips,
This technique I find the best for creating microtones around one pitch;
or for creating a “sound effect” rather than an exact microtone pitch.
by covering or uncovering the holes partially,
This method is similar to an execution of a flattement[73], apart
from the fact that flattement is a continuous movement around one
pitch, while the microtone is created only by one “slide” of the finger.
However, the flattement also creates a microtonal modulation.
by a combination of the first and the second way.
This method is the most flexible, and gives the performer a number of
possibilities and more freedom. Matteo Gemolo employs a similar way of
producing the microtones, summarizing: “Smaller intervals (smaller
than quarter-tones, note: author) are made possible by gradually
covering the holes of the flute with the fingers and tuning those
pitches with an upward or downward rolling of the embouchure.”[74]
An interesting fact is that the use of microtones was known already in
18th century. One of the appendixes of De Lusse´s treatise includes an
air called ΄Air a la Grecque΄ for flute and bass, which involves some
microtonal passages. Next to the air De Lusse gives a table with
fingerings for all the included quarter-tone pitches. Below is an
excerpt, with the fingerings for the flute (the upper line) next to it.
Matteo Gemolo mentions the air in one of his articles: "Due to its
natural flexibility in tuning, the one-keyed flute was used to explore
microtonality almost since its birth. In ΄L´Art de la flute traversière΄
the French flautist Charles De Lusse (ca. 1720-ca. 1774) presented what
is considered the first chart of quarter-tones, writing in the appendix
of his method a tune entitled ΄Air à la grecque΄ in which those
intervals could be applied. A few years later, one of the best-known
flute virtuosos of his time, Pierre-Gabriel Buffardin (ca. 1690-1768),
referred directly to De Lusse´s microtonal pieces, expressing his
interest in the system of quarter-tones in a letter published in
΄Mercure de France΄ in September, 1764 (Kollpacher-Haas, 1962)."[75]
What I suggest as worth further experimenting with, is to use some of
the “harmonic sounds” as microtonal fingerings as well. As we could see
in 3.1.1.1 Natural Harmonics some pitches of the harmonic series sound
slightly higher or lower compared to their equivalent fingerings.
Therefore these sounding “harmonic sounds” could be used as “microtonal
fingerings”.
3.1.3 GLISSANDO
Gemolo compares a glissando to a portamento: “The similarities with
portamento are many. … The employment with portamentoseems to
relate more to performance practice than to a technique stipulated by
composers.”[76] Unlike portamento, glissando always follows a specific
symbol in the notated music. A picture with notation of two different
glissandi types below is taken from Robert Dick´s book:
According to Gemolo, the glissando is one of the most frequently
employed techniques in contemporary music for the one-keyed flute due to
its great flexibility and effectiveness.
It can be produced in one of the following ways:
by rolling the flute in or out to lower or raise the pitch
by sliding the fingers off the rims of the finger-holes
by a combination of both the rolling of the flute and the sliding of
the fingers
Rolling the head-joint of the flute in or out is the easiest way how to
produce glissando on the one-keyed flute, and this way is also very
flexible.
Based on my own experience, it is easily possible to produce a glissando
also between relatively large intervals, such as an octave. Similarly as
mentioned above, we can just slide one of the available fingers (one
which is not included in playing the given pitches) on or off an
available finger-hole. From my own exploration, there is no exact way
(there are no “glissando fingerings”) how to play a glissando. This
gives the performer a space and a flexibility using own sensibility and
creativity to execute a particular glissando within a given musical
context.
Even though we focus on 18th century flute methods, it is worth
mentioning that Fürstenau has in his method (1844) a whole section[77]
on the glissando. This raises a question: when did the use of glissando
become common in flute playing? We may assume, the practice of glissando
had existed before it was noted down by Fürstenau. The one-keyed
flute is from its constructional perspective the most natural instrument
to produce the glissando (it has no keys – only finger-holes which
makes the sliding of the fingers on and off the holes even easier). Therefore I
would suggest that the use of glissando perhaps dates back already to
18th century.
3.2 MULTIPLE SOUNDS
3.2.1 Multiple sonorities
Producing multiple sonorities requires great embouchure flexibility.
Embouchure positions that resonate several tones at once require greater
exactness and control, but we can achieve this through regular practice
and experimenting. R. Dick says: “The embouchure developed through
working with multiple sonorities is a great benefit to traditional
playing since tone, flexibility, and control can be much
improved.”[78]
Including this technique into one´s regular practice improves embouchure
control and sound in general, as well as enhancing sensitivity for
hearing very subtle changes in tuning, tone colour and dynamics.
On the one-keyed flute this subject still needs to be more thoroughly
explored, and it goes beyond this research. However, in the fourth chapter
we will see some examples of multiple sonorities in chosen contemporary
pieces for traverso.
3.2.2. Singing and playing simultaneously
This technique is a common practice in contemporary music. Simply put,
it is a combination of the flutist singing while playing at the same
time. The sound and timbre of the resulting sonorities depend both on
the pitch played and on the flutist´s voice. Some intervals are easier
to produce, others are more difficult. In general, the result is very
individual, differing from performer to performer. However, there are
some general observations:
singing in unison or octave with the pitch played is relatively easy
(according to R. Dick)
consonant intervals like thirds, fourths, and fifths are also
relatively easy to produced (based on my exploration)
dissonant intervals like minor or major seconds, augmented fourth,
or minor and major seventh are more difficult to produce (based on
my experience)
singing and playing simultaneously creates a difference tone - a
third tone sounding between the sung and played pitch created by
their modulation
singing and playing simultaneously restricts the dynamic of the
played pitch (according to R. Dick)
by regular practice, it is possible to achieve clearness and
exactness also with more difficult intervals and with multiple
sonorities
3.3. OTHER SONORITIES
3.3.1 Flutter tonguing
Flutter-tonguing [f.–t.] is the rolling of the tongue while blowing
into the flute. We produce it by fluent “pronunciation” of “rrrrrr” at
the tip of the tongue. Other names for flutter-tonguing are German
flatterzunge [flz. / flt.] or Italian frullato [frull]. Symbols
for flutter-tonguing are traditionally notated as one of the
symbols[79] below:
According to both R. Dick and M. Gemolo there are two ways
flutter-tonguing can be produced:
by rolling of the constant “rrrr” at the tip of the tongue
by pronouncing “rrr” inside the throat – by the uvula with tongue
placed far back in the throat, therefore called uvular flutter or
“roar-flutter”
The flutter-tonguing can be easily varied depending on the speed and
intensity of the pulsations, and it can be applied in various measures
to all sonorities produced on the one-keyed flute. Based on my personal
experience, it is up to performer´s own exploration to find out which of
the two ways of flutter-tonguing works best in each octave or on a
given pitch. Some performers have the ability to produce
flutter-tonguing by both ways (this can also improve by regular
practice), some performers can only produce one of the two types.
On the low notes ranging from D´ to G´, I personally find it easier to
use the uvular flutter because it sounds clearer than using the
rolling of the “r”, which produces a very airy effect with softer and
slower pulsations. Above G´ the rolling of the “r” gets easier to
produce and it works well also on the higher notes (in the second and
third octaves). In addition to this, performer´s choice of the execution
will much depend on the musical context, composer´s specific
requirements and the character or the effect that the performer wants to
convey.
3.3.2. Percussive sounds
Percussive sounds are produced by clicking of the tongue, and on the
modern flute by slapping of the keys. On the one-keyed flute a similar
way would be to use the slapping on the finger holes, but this technique
produces extremely soft percussive sound, and it is not very effective,
unless used for a very soft and very special effect. According to R.
Dick´s book, the symbol for the tongue click is as follows:
On the one-keyed flute I personally find the most effective percussive
sounds produced by clicking of the tongue. The clicking can be directed
more into the embouchure hole for more intense effect. Tongue clicks can
be produced on any pitch of the flute. If we “hold” a fingering of a
particular pitch, it will sound together with the clicking.
4. CHOSEN CONTEMPORARY PIECES FOR TRAVERSO SOLO
In this chapter I will closely look at two contemporary pieces for
traverso. There are several reasons for choosing these two pieces:
they are both for solo traverso – unaccompanied and acoustic,
they both deal with ΄extended techniques΄,
they take the one-keyed flute fully out of “its comfort zone” (out
of its traditional technical and aesthetic context) but at the same
time still use its natural technical abilities and sound
characteristics,
they are differently notated and each of them deals with a different
interpretative approach.
The first piece Anspielungen by Hans-Martin Linde is in the sense of
notation and used techniques a more “traditional” piece as compared to
the second piece JMF for DM for traverso solo by Daniel Matej.
However, from the perspective of novelty and more unconventional
approach of using the baroque flute Anspielungen is a piece offering a
different view and a different technical approach as compared to the
traditional repertoire. JMF for DM for traverso solo is notated as a
verbal score[80] where much depends on the performer´s creativity in
the performance of the piece.
I will do an analysis of each piece covering different aspects: the
structure of the piece, use of traditional and/or extended techniques,
interpretative possibilities and performance opinion of each piece. The
analysis is largely performed from my own interpretative perspective.
This piece[81] was written in 1988 and apart from the above mentioned
reasons I chose it because it is one of the first contemporary pieces
written for an unaccompanied baroque flute. In Preface the composer
explains the title ΄Anspielungen΄ – a German word of double meaning
translated as “to try out” or “to allude to”. The title itself contains
composer´s idea of the piece, where he wants to try out different
sound possibilities of the instrument as well as to allude to
well-known flute pieces and deal with “typical passages” of earlier
styles.
The composition has two movements marked as I and II, and it
contains composer´s performance directions with explanations of
symbols used in the score. The piece was written for Konrad
Hünteler[82].
Movement I
H.-M. Linde: Anspielungen I, recorded in Studio 1, Koninklijk Conservatium Den Haag, on February 19th 2020, traverso: Dorota Matejová; sound engineer: Jakub Klimeš
Structurally we can divide the first movement into three bigger
sections, based on their motivic material. Each of these sections is
divided into phrases. Phrasing is important here and I assume that the
composer himself thought of phrases, when he divided the movement by
three types of fermatas: “normal”, “longer” and “very long” pauses
(fermatas), each of them having its specific symbol. From a performance
perspective we can see the fermatas not only as phrase divisions, but
also as moments connecting the phrases through silences. Therefore it is
important to keep the tension through these, variously long, silences.
The first section, bars 1 – 12, is divided into four shorter
phrases:
The opening phrase (picture 1.) is marked Calmo and starts the
piece with a long D´ accompanied by sung F´ after the first beat of
the bar, ending in staccato A´. We can say the phrase is in “f minor
environment”. It ends by voice dissolving into piano completing
the phrase with a “normal pause” (fermata).
picture 1.
Here we can already find two first extended techniques – singing and
playing simultaneously and a vibrato (“Vibr.”). Throughout the piece the composer asks for three
types of vibrato[83]: “diaphragm vibrato”, “tongue vibrato” and
“vibrating the instrument by moving the right hand”. In bar 2, a
“diaphragm vibrato” is required. The intervals are a sixth apart and
therefore in a comfortable singing position, and the diaphragm vibrato I
find to be produced easily. In bar 2, I suggest to use “no tongue” when
starting the Bb´´ to achieve a softer piano effect.
The second phrase, bars 3-4, marked Liberamente has a
rhythmically more “free” character consisting of short sixteenth
notes passages alternated by three long notes, which form the basic
structure of the phrase keeping a relation with the first phrase.
The second phrase ends with G´´ accompanied by sung A´ started with
a portamento (picture 2.). I execute this portamento starting to
sing G´ (in an octave unison with the flute), slowly sliding up to
A´. The phrase ends with a “normal” length fermata.
picture 2.
The third phrase, bars 5-7, is marked a tempo, which in my
opinion means that the performer should keep a clearer rhythmical
pulse. The phrase includes again the two extended techniques –
singing while playing simultaneously (bar 5), this
time in an interval of minor 6th, and a “diaphragm”
vibrato at the end of bar 5. Bar 6 starting with a
quintuplet through “forte e agitato” passage resolves into the first
allusion in the piece (picture 3.) – rhythmically diminished short
motive from Bach´s E minor Flute Sonata[84]. Bar 7 calming down and
diminishing in dynamics (pp and p) ends with a
glissando, another extended technique. The little
staccato dot on B´´ (picture 3.) suggests a good placing of the last
note. This last two-note motive is further developed in the fourth
phrase. This phrase ends with a first “very long” fermata of the
piece.
picture 3.
The fourth phrase, bars 8-12, marked Moderato, and similarly to
first phrase has a “singing” character, but with a slightly faster
metronome marking. It develops the very last motif of the previous
phrase by rhythmical augmentation (in bars 8-11), suggesting a
“sighing effect”, often used in baroque music. The phrase includes a
new effect: type of singing where the pitch is sung over the
mouth-hole while the fingered note (marked in a square)
sounds too (picture 4.). This creates a “buzzing”
sound with slightly “rough” character, if the intervals are close
(like sung A´ and pitched B´´ - picture 4.).
picture 4.
Another technique included in this phrase is a flattement (“flatt.”),
a finger vibrato in bar 12 (picture 5.); interestingly enough
flattement here is perceived as an ΄extended technique΄. The bar ends
with a rapid “run” ending in ff on a high G´´´.
picture 5.
The “very long” fermata at the end of this phrase marks also the end of
the first section of the 1st movement.
The second section, bars 13-18, is divided into phrases by “normal”
length fermatas, and one “longer” fermata between bars 17 and 18. This
section consists of long-tone phrases in ppp dynamics, which are
“interrupted” by staccato and scherzando phrases.
The fifth phrase (fifth in the 1stmovement), bars 13-15, starting
as Molto tranquillo, includes several ΄extended techniques΄:
flattement on long notes and
glissandos between quarter notes and half-notes
(picture 6.) while the quarter notes should be slightly raised or
lowered. This way a sort of microtonal work is
employed - the performer needs to do this quite intuitively since
the exact microtonal pitch is not determined. This first part of the
phrase (picture 6.) is in ppp dynamics with subtle inner dynamics
marked within.
picture 6.
This very quiet passage is followed by a two-bar passage of staccated
eight-notes, some of these accentuated, all in piano dynamics. In
bar 15, the phrase comes back to long tones with glissandos in ppp
dynamics, however now in a tempo, therefore in a more rhythmically
pulsating character, ending with a high “diaphragm-vibrated” F#´´´ in
ff. I see the ppp passages in this phrase as balancing between the
instrument´s audibility and inaudibility; we can perceive them as a
“whisper”.
The sixth phrase, bars 16-17, Allegro scherzando, is rapid and
staccato, starting with scherzando character (bar 16) continuing
more rhythmically in a tempo (bar 17), with a second allusion in
the piece at the end of bar 17 (see below), this time to C.P.E.
Bach´s solo flute sonata[85].
The seventh phrase, bar 18, Tranquillo e libero, brings back the
“whisper” motivic materials of fifth phrase, now the tones come in
intervals over an octave.
After this, a passage marked più mosso follows. I see it as an
intermezzo before the last – third – section of the piece. It
includes some very short motives alternated by rests, one
glissando, and a chord sound (picture 7.)
at its end. For the chord to sound both pitches we need to find a good
position of the embouchure. I find it works best if the airstream is
directed much into the flute. Depending how strong we want the chord
to sound, we can have a bigger (more sound) or smaller (less sound)
lip opening.
picture 7.
The third section, bars 22-25, marked Moderato is the longest
rhythmical section of the first movement. It starts in ppp
dynamics alternating sixteenth-note sextuplets, quintuplets and
quadruplets. I tend to play this passage at the limit of audibility. I
find that the changing rhythm interestingly adds an inner
micro-dynamics of this almost “inaudible” passage, which, in my
opinion, creates the magic of it.
After the first (very long!) bar, the dynamics jumps to mf
dynamics with crescendos and decrescendos of sextuplets at
the end of the bar. What I find interesting in this passage is that it
uses a lot of flat signs – for example G b´´, which to me suggests a
certain “softer” and “rounder” tone colour. The last bar (25) of the
movement includes only few notes with rests in between (picture 8.).
The movement ends in almost silence and some mystery, leaving the
listener waiting for what comes next.
picture 8.
The first movement uses the full range of the traverso from D´ to G´´´
and requires a full range of dynamics from ppp to ff which
on the traverso is one of the challenges. While it might seem that most
of the interpretative requirements are precisely marked, I find that
there is a lot up to performer´s choice, such as the length of fermatas,
or the way some of the techniques are executed. For example, the
glissandos could be executed by rolling the flute or by sliding the
fingers on and off the finger-holes. The passages can be played in
different dynamic ranges depending on performer´s ability, the tone
colour of passages will vary from performer to performer, etc.
What I also find worth mentioning is that the passages can be seen as
“gestures”, having their rhetoric, phrasing and articulation, similarly
to 18th century music. In form, the first movement might remind us of
Telemann Fantasias for solo traverso[86]. Similarly to this
Movement I, they often include slow-fast-slow-fast or fast-slow-fast-slow
passages within one movement, such as in Fantasias No. 3, 5, and 12; or
very short motives repeated successively in two different tempi, such as
in Fantasia No. 1 (adagio – allegro of the Vivace).
Movement II
H.-M. Linde: Anspielungen II, recorded in Studio 1, Koninklijk Conservatium Den Haag, on February 19th 2020, traverso: Dorota Matejová; sound engineer: Jakub Klimeš
From my perspective, the second movement can be divided into four bigger
sections; we could parallel them to some baroque forms: first section as
a Prelude, second section as a dance (perhaps Allemande), third section
as an Interlude, and fourth section – a Coda - as a Gigue.
The first section consisting of three very long bars has a ´Prelude´
character marked as Liberamente which implies that a rhythmical
freedom within the phrases can be taken. The composer uses three types
of vibrato on long notes: a “tongue vibrato” (picture 9.); an “irregular
finger vibrato” (picture 10.); and in bar 3 both a “diaphragm vibrato”
and a “tongue vibrato” (picture 11.).
picture 9.
picture 10.
picture 11.
I found out, that the “tongue vibrato” can be executed in different
ways: 1. by saying “lu-lu-lu” without touching the palette with the
tongue; 2. by saying “lu-lu-lu” and moving the tongue to the sides; 3.
by “vibrating” the root of the tongue. At the end of the ΄Prelude΄ there
is a “very long” fermata suggesting an end of a movement, just like in a
baroque suite or sonata.
The second section, bars 4-26, is the longest one of the second
movement. It is a rhythmical section, and for the first time in the
piece there are metre signatures indicated by the composer. The section
is dynamically phrased and its returning motif is a seventh chord
consisting of a minor triad and a major seventh (d´-f´-a´-c#´).
From bar 13-19, the tempo stays in ¾ metre and the whole section
consists of triplets in varied articulations. In this section the affect
changes, it has a more singing and mellow character. In bar 18-19, a new
extended technique occurs: hard tonguing effect marked as
sputato (picture 12.).
picture 12.
I produce this with a tongue placed on the palette and releasing it with
saying “t”. The “percussive” sound is produced by the air releasing the
pressure between the tip of the tongue and the palette, fingered pitches
sounding at the same time.
A passage marked a tempo, forte and brillante starts in bar
20, consisting of sixteenth-notes alternating between staccato and
legato articulations. Last bar of the section (b. 26) includes the same
allusion to a motif from C.P.E. Bach´s solo flute sonata as we saw in
the Movement I, this time slightly varied (picture 13.). This motif
resolves the section into bar 27, where the ΄Interlude΄ starts.
picture 13.
The second section reminds of a dance in duple metre, perhaps an
Allemande or Gavotte.
The third section, an ΄Interlude΄, bars 27-29, marked meno mosso
e libero has a calmer character. Bar 27 asks for a low C#´, which
the one-keyed flute (the lowest note is D´), does not have – therefore
the composer asks to produce it with a fingering of d´ but “turning the
flute firmly inwards” to lower the pitch. The beginning of
bar 29 includes an allusion to another motif from C.P.E. Bach´s solo
sonata[87], in diminished rhythm (picture 14.).
picture 14.
The ΄Interlude΄ ends in ppp dynamics with repeated notes played by
vibrato type - “vibrating the instrument by moving the right
hand” (picture 15.).
picture 15.
The fourth section, bars 30-39, marked Presto, can be seen
either as a Coda or as a last movement of this “contemporary suite” – a
dance reminding of Gigue. Consisting of mostly triplet and sextuplet
rhythms, the motivic material of the second section comes back here
(d´-f´-a´-c#´) in sextuplets. Bar 32 includes the last ΄extended
technique΄ of the piece, a flutter-tonguing (picture 16.).
picture 16.
The ending of the piece is in the last three bars. In bar 37, three
rapid jumps over two octaves marked ff and pesante result in bar
38 on a high G´´´ vibrated by the “moving the instrument by the right
hand” diminishing into pp which is challenging on such a high note.
After this, there is a “very long” fermata before the last bar. The last
bar (picture 17.) Prestissimo ends the whole piece in
sixteenth-notes jumps into the last high A´´´, accentuated and in the
strongest volume.
picture 17.
This tone is the highest one on the traverso, and in my opinion, the
composer hints here to the same ending tone of the first movement of
J.S. Bach´s Partita[88] for solo traverso.
4.2 Daniel Matej (*1963): JMF for DM for traverso solo
The origin of this piece dates back to somewhere at the beginning of
2013, when I asked the Slovak composer Daniel Matej to write a piece for
my graduation exam in modern flute. Thus in June 2013 I premiered a
piece called JMF for DM, which at that time the composer wrote for
a modern flute and a “prepared piano”[89]. The letters in the title
stand for “Jesu Meine Freude for Dorota Matejová”, where Jesu
Meine Freude refers to the famous choral, based on which J.S. Bach wrote
the same name motet.
The version for traverso solo originated in spring 2015, and was written
specially for a celebration concert at occasion of Commenius Day in
Naarden. Until today this piece has several versions. Below is a
citation from a recent programme note by composer himself, which
describes the piece fittingly:
"Daniel Matejʼs verbal score JMF for DM (its first concept dates
back to year 2013) is in a way a work-in-progress and today exists in
numerous versions, starting from the one for a solo flute (or traverso)
and ending with a version for an unspecified instrumental ensemble (in
regard both to its size and instrumentation). From a certain point of
view, the process taking place during its realization could be perceived
as a “journey through various sound space-time continuums”, or we could
understand it as a transformation from the “tumultuous brutality of the
everyday” to “the state of quieting the mind and heart,” and therefore
(as John Cage would say) to being “susceptible to divine
influences”… "
The verbal score of the piece is divided into four sections marked as A,
B, C and D (meant as a coda). The piece lasts approximately 7 minutes,
while each section has an approximate chronometric duration
“recommended” by the composer.
Section A, lasts approximately 1 and ½ minutes, and its basic
material are short sforzandoff “attacks” in the highest (and
occasionally also lowest) register of the instrument. The tension of
this section comes out of two “rhythmic processes”: the “attacks” played
in a regular pulse for few seconds, and the pulse dissolving after few
seconds into irregularity. These two “processes” should be repeated
several times. The harsh and “noise-like” sound character of the
“attacks” could be seen in a context of bruitism[90] in music.
Section B, lasting approximately two minutes, consists of two basic
sound motifs: the “attacks” from section A and a set of tones in a
twelve tone row, determined by the composer (picture 18.). This set of
tones can be seen in a context of serialism[91].
picture 18.
The “attacks” are slowly replaced by the set, which is to be played in
the whole range of the instrument and always played in the same order as
composer set it. The whole process is slowly calming down, the “attacks”
are slowly disappearing, and a new sound material is introduced: the
tones of the set are to be played in various colours and articulations,
and some of them should be articulated in repetitions resembling a
“Morse code” rhythm. Now it is up to performer´s imagination to use some
of the ΄extended techniques΄ as well: tones played as
multiphonics, flutter-tongued tones, tones
in different colours, “percussioned” tones,
tones senza colore (without colour), etc.
In Section C, lasting approximately also two minutes, the series
from section B are still played in arbitrary articulations of various
sounds, but gradually, five selected tones of the series, including D´
and A´ outbalance from all the twelve tones – the serialism slowly
dissolves into “white-keys” diatonic[92]. These selected tones should
be played with sforzando and “die out” in diminuendo. Slowly, they
order themselves into the melodic succession of the beginning of the
chorale cited in the last section (Coda) – a descending pentachord
(picture 19.).
picture 19.
Section D (Coda), lasting approximately 1 and ½ minute, is the last
section of the piece and it is the only part that is notated in a kind
of traditional notation. It is based on choral from Bach´s
motet Jesu Meine Freude[93]. It is notated in ppp dynamics with
freer rhythm, which is three times “disturbed” (or, as composer says in
the instructions - could be) by “Morse code” at the end tones of phrases.
The whole piece “dies out” on the low D´ “shaking” in Morse code and the
softest possible dynamics on the traverso.
We could say that the piece JMF for DM for traverso solo is one huge
diminuendo, starting with the most extreme sounds on the instrument and
ending in its well-known “environment” – Bach´s choral, however in a
completely different sound colour, and completely different context.
If we compare the two described compositions, we can come to several
conclusions that I will base on my own perspective and opinion after
analysing both. H.-M. Linde´s piece symbolically comes from the ΄early
music΄ environment and mindset into contemporary environment. This piece
is based on the exploration of the instrument itself, its technical and
sound possibilities, employing some ΄extended techniques΄ as well. In
the way it is written, we can find some parallels with an 18th century
solo compositions (like G. Ph. Telemann´s Fantasias): clear phrasing,
motives that are repeated or developed, alternation between fast and
slow sections, virtuosic passages, etc. Even though the composition is
traditionally notated, we can find several ways how to execute and
interpret particular phrases. The performance of this composition will
depend upon each performer individually.
On the other hand, Matej´s composition is notated untraditionally and
leaves quite a large space for performer´s interpretation and choice of
sounds and extended techniques. Therefore it might be even more
challenging to perform it, if we want to transmit the idea of the piece
clearly and faithfully. We could almost say that it does not matter,
which instrument performs this piece, but the idea is what is basic
here; and we should find a way how to communicate each section and the
piece as a whole through all the sound possibilities of the instrument
– in my case, the traverso. Starting from a purely contemporary
environment, the composition slowly diminishes into Bach´s choral, like
to a “forgotten memory”, sounding only one single time at the very end
of the whole process.
5. EXTENDED TECHNIQUES AND TRADITIONAL TRAVERSO REPERTOIRE
After exploring the realm of ΄extended techniques΄, and exploring two
contemporary compositions for traverso solo involving ΄extended
techniques΄ and untraditional approach to the sound possibilities of the
traverso, I am coming to ask a question that I have been asking at the
beginning of my research:
Can the exploration and experimenting with the ΄extended techniques΄
and playing contemporary music on the traverso influence my
performance of the traditional traverso repertoire: the 18th
century music? Can it inspire the performance of the baroque
repertoire? Or are these techniques exclusively connected to the
performance of contemporary traverso music?
To which extent can my explorations and working with the new
techniques be influential on my perception of traverso ΄sound ideal΄
as such?
5.1 Effect of ΄extended techniques΄ and contemporary music practice on traditional playing technique on the one-keyed flute
Based on my experience with practicing the ΄extended techniques΄ on the
traverso, this practice can be beneficial for the performer already for
its purely technical aspect. I have found out that the traditional
traverso technique can positively benefit from both experimenting with
΄extended techniques΄ and exploring the contemporary repertoire in these
aspects:
it expands the range of the instrument´s tone colours
it expands the dynamic range to the instrument´s limits: ppp – ff
it expands perception of nuances in intonation
it helps developing a flexibility of the embouchure
it inspires the performer´s imagination
R. Dick supports my observations, when he writes: “… it is also
significant to note that many flutists may find working with the new
sonorities and techniques beneficial to their traditional playing,
especially in the area of tone development. Quite simply, practice of
the new sonorities serves to develop both the strength and suppleness of
the embouchure.”[94]
5.2 What can we consider as ΄extended techniques΄ for the one-keyed flute in 18th century?
As I have explained in the third chapter, the knowledge of the more
untraditional ΄single sounds΄ techniques, such as harmonic series,
alternative fingerings, microtones, etc., existed already in 18th
century. Furthermore, Matteo Gemolo argues that the use of ΄multiple
sonorities΄ on the flute is also not a 20th century discovery – this
technique was known already at the beginning of the 19th century:
“… if we look at the history of the flute at the beginning of the
19th century, the Austrian flutist Georg Bayr (1733 – 1833) was
already working on a method to address one of the techniques that would
become so popular a century later: how to play more notes at the same
time on the flute or, as we call them nowadays, multiphonics.”[95]
In this context, our understanding of what are the traditional
techniques and what are the ΄extended techniques΄ might come into a
question. Few examples of the techniques perceived nowadays as
΄extended΄, but described already in 18th century in some flute
treatises, to mention are:
Charles De Lusse describes and explains the harmonic
series[96] on the traverso. One of the appendixes of
his treatise is ΄Air a la Grecque΄, a short composition including
microtonal segments (see 3.1.2 Microtones).
Under ´tone colouration´, the techniques of alternative
fingerings and embouchure control were
practices used as a part of 18th century common traverso
technique, described in the treatises[97].
In the section 3.1.3 Glissando, we mentioned Fürstenau dedicating
a whole chapter to the use of this technique (1844). Based
on this observation, we might assume that the use of glissando dates
back to the 18th century, since its execution on the one-keyed
flute is the most natural compared to flutes with added keys.
For other ΄extended techniques΄ of the 18th century΄ we could also
consider:
Charles De Lusse also describes three types of
vibrato[98], each type is used for expression of a
different affect in a composition. Included in his treatise are also
virtuosic etudes for the one-keyed flute that use the instrument´s
full range (d´- a´´´), and their
virtuosity does not have an analogy with any other
known etudes for the one-keyed flute of mid-18th century (ca.
1761).
(Interestingly, Hans-Martin Linde in Anspielungen also employs
three types of vibrato - see Chapter 4, and he treats
them as ΄extended techniques΄, assuming from the fact he includes
the vibratos in “performance directions” to the piece.)
Flattement, also known as finger vibrato, was a
common practice on the one-keyed flute since its beginning, used
especially on longer notes to give them shape and a “meaning”.
Hotteterre describes a flattement for each single tone[99].
Tromlitz describes the execution of the finger vibrato like this:
"According to the situation, only a little or half of the hole may
be covered, or you may use another hole altogether, and cover it
completely each time your finger moves. …A precise description of
how much of the hole the finger should cover is not possible here.
Since the tone, through the use of vibrato, must be kept moving up
and down a little, the ear will easily be able to discern how much
should be covered with each movement of the finger. Some tones will
require only a fourth, others a half, still others three fourths,
and for some, the entire hole will be covered."[100]
(In Anspielungen, Linde treats a flattement as a special
effect.)
Different types of articulations we could consider as
΄extended techniques΄: all the 18th century flute treatises
mention articulations, they differ slightly by each author and some
of them are very advanced.
Such are for example: Quantz advices to use the double tongue
did´ll for very fast passages[101]; De Lusse advices to use
syllable HU produced by movement of the lungs for slow and
tender movements, and syllable LOUL which is meant only for
cappricio passages, and passages which characterise winds or
tempests, and for syncopation syllables T - HÉ[102].
In 18th century all the above mentioned techniques would be used in
the context of expressing the passions through music performance. Their
execution is related directly to the expression of a particular baroque
affect. Therefore we could say that in the 18th century perspective,
the ΄extended΄ stands for the emotional content carried out through a
technical execution on the instrument.
5.3 How can these discoveries feed back to the traditional traverso repertoire?
We can say that the ΄extended techniques΄ exist in contemporary music to
create various “effects”, as Gemolo says[103]. These “effects” always
carry out a meaning, and even though contemporary music might be
sometimes perceived as more abstract compared to the traditional
traverso repertoire, it does carry certain emotional content. Therefore
we could also say that the ΄extended techniques΄ are a kind of emotional
language of contemporary music. Here, we can find a parallel with
baroque music. From 18th century perspective, the playing technique of
the one-keyed flute was a tool for expression of the emotional content
of the music – the passions.
What comes now into question is how our explorations of traverso sound
possibilities and expanding its “limitations” can feed back to the
traditional repertoire and its performance. There are several
conclusions I have made.
Firstly, the purely technical benefits (mentioned earlier in this
chapter) of practicing the ΄extended techniques΄ on the traverso can
already feed back to the performance of the traditional repertoire since
they open up performer´s perception of the instrument´s sound
possibilities. Therefore the performer has more freedom to perform the
18th century flute compositions in an enriched and deepened expressive
imagination. Secondly, we might start to see the notation of traditional
flute pieces in a different perspective. Our imagination of the sound
possibilities of the notated motives and phrases can perhaps lead us to
become freer and less “attached” to the score, using the score more as
guidance for expressing the music and its passions through the ΄sound΄
rather than literally executing what and how it is written.
I chose two excerpts which can serve us as an example of seeing the
execution of some notations of 18th century flute music in a new
perspective:
In cantata ΄Pat et Sirinx΄[104] by M.P. de Montèclair, in one of
the recits[105] the flute imitates the voice.
The voice is notated like this:
The flute part imitates this motive right after the voice:
As we can see, the symbols (between the half-note into the
eight-note) in both voice and flute part are the same and they look
just like the symbol for glissando. Therefore, based
on the notation of the symbol and the musical content and context
here I execute this moment in the piece as a glissando. From the
perspective of the emotional meaning, this glissando expresses here
“sighing” or “crying”.
Another example from the same cantata, in the air ΄Restes plaintifs
de l´objet que j´adore΄, in the transition between the “verses” the
flute has a small duet with the cello. From my perspective, the
flute here plays the weeping Sirinx that had turned into reeds
growing by the water. The flute part is notated like below, playing
two “crying” or “sighing” motives ended by written ΄coupez΄ on the
last note:
I execute these ΄coupez΄ pulling the air from the lungs producing
syllable HU (like De Lusse suggests in one of his articulations),
shortening the last note of the motive (which has ΄coupez΄ notated
above). Musically this execution suggests a sob of Sirinx.
The C.P.E. Bach´s ΄Sonata in A minor for Unaccompanied Flute΄, Wq.
132, written in 1747, is a fairly untraditional and experimental
piece already for its own time, especially the first movement Poco
Adagio consisting of many big jumps, dissonant intervals and sudden
dynamic changes. The opening bars of the sonata involve all these:
The first tone of each bar is marked forte with an
articulation mark, which means either a very strongly tongued note
or a note really „placed in time". We could execute it almost as
strongly attacked percussive tone. The motive
continues in piano and slurred tones. Depending on the context
in the movement, we could execute some of the slurs in glissando
manner.
From these examples, we can see that often the interpretative execution
of notation of 18th century traverso repertoire depends on our own
understanding of musical context and our imagination behind the notated
motives/phrases, of course having the knowledge of baroque principles as
a base.
These discoveries also suggest there may be many more 18th century
musical passages and utterances, which we might see - after
encountering the expressive potential of extended techniques - as
inviting greater contrast, and more extreme and deeper expression than
HIP performers have tended to assume until now.
6. Conclusion
During the process of my work I have been slowly beginning to understand how much are the musical taste and musical aesthetic, including the technical aspects of instruments and their sound ideals, influenced by the current circumstances in the music world. Furthermore, I have found out that the understanding of what is considered ΄traditional΄ and what ΄untraditional΄ - or ΄extended΄ - in music performance and instrument´s technique largely depends upon our understanding of historical contexts, our perspective of modern-day ΄sound ideal΄ of the traverso, and until what extent the modern-day perspectives on the ΄sound ideal΄ influence us.
If we now consider the question what are the ΄traditional techniques΄ on the one-keyed flute and what are the ΄extended techniques΄, we might ask ourselves further: what had happened during the history of music that had resulted into today´s division between ΄traditional΄ and ΄untraditional techniques΄, and their use only for purposes in one field of music – either 18th century or contemporary music performance?
As we could see, in 18th century, the ΄sound΄ and playing technique of the traverso was a tool for expression through musical performance. We will never know exactly until what extent the 18th century performers used their instruments - from modern-day perspective, “untraditionally”, in search for expressive possibilities. However, I suggest we might want to deepen our own search for expressive possibilities through sound (and other devices) in ΄early music΄ performance, inspired by these new perspectives on 18th century performance.
Furthermore, the widened perspective of traverso sound possibilities and breaking through its “limitations” coming from our experimentation with the ΄extended techniques΄ and exploration of some contemporary traverso repertoire gives us the possibility to be much freer in using the instrument´s technique and sound for the purpose of expression.
Apart from all these “discoveries”, this research has become a part of my personal search for both my sound on the traverso and more complex expressive abilities. The exploration of contemporary music for traverso has become my “work in progress”, including the recording of *Anspielungen and experimentation with JMF for DM for traverso solo. I am hoping to develop the “sound world” of these and other pieces further, and continue my work with some composers I have come to collaborate during the process of my research.
Lastly, I would like to express my many thanks to Kate Clark, Daniel Matej, Matteo Gemolo, Jed Wentz, Kat Carson, Jakub Klimeš, Maja Miró, and my family and friends for their help, advices and support during the process of my work.
Dorota Matejová,
February 2020, Den Haag
7. Bibliography
BARTOLOZZI, Bruno: New sounds for woodwind. Translated and edited by Reginald Smith Brindle. London: Oxford University Press, 1967. ISBN 0-19-318607-1
BOLAND, Janice Dockendorff: Method for the One-Keyed Flute (1998). London: University of California Press, 1998. ISBN 0-520-21447-1
DE LUSSE, Charles : L´Art de la flûte traversière (Paris ca. 1761). Firenze : Studio per edizioni scelte, 1997.
DICK, Robert: THE OTHER FLUTE: A Performance Manual of Contemporary Techniques. London: Oxford University Press, 1975. ISBN 0-19-3221-25-X
FÜRSTENAU, Anton Bernhard: Die Kunst des Flötenspiels (1844). Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel, 1844.
GEMOLO, Matteo: ΄Extended techniques on the traverso: The case of the glissando and the flattement΄, ÍMPAR, Online Journal for Artistic Research, Vol.2, No.2 (2018), p. 30-47. ISSN 2184-1993
GEMOLO, Matteo: ΄Extended techniques on the traverso (part 2): the case of the flutter-tonguing and microtones in the post-modernist repertoire for the one-keyed flute΄, ÍMPAR Online journal for artistic research, Vol. 3, No. 1 (2019), p. 5-23. ISSN 2184-1993
HARNONCOURT, Nikolaus: Musik als Klangrede (1982). Translated by Mary O´Neill: Music As Speech, Ways to a New Understanding of Music. Portland, Oregon: Amadeus Press, 1995. ISBN 0-931340-91-8
HAYNES, Bruce: The End of Early Music; A period performer´s history of music for the twenty-first century (2007). New York: Oxford University Press, 2007. ISBN 978-0-19-518987-2
HOTTETERRE, Jacques Martin : Principes de la Flûte traversière, ou flûte d´Allemagne; de la flute à bec, ou flute douce; et du haut-bois (1707). Translated and edited by David Lasocki. London: Barrie & Rockliff, The Cresset Press, 1968.
KUIJKEN, Barthold: The Notation Is Not the Music; Reflections on Early Music Practice and Performance. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2013. ISBN 978-0-253-01060-5
POWELL, Ardal: The Flute (2001). New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2002. ISBN 0-300-09341-1
QUANTZ, Johann Joachim: Versuch einer Anweisung die Flöte traversiere zu spielen (Berlin 1752). Translated by Edward R. Reilly: On playing the flute; a complete translation with an introduction and notes by E. R. Reilly. London: Faber and Faber, 1966.
RUSCCOL, Herbert: The liberation of sound: an introduction to electronic music (1972). London: Prentice Hall, 1972. ISBN 0-13-535393-9
TROMLITZ, Johann George: Unterricht die Flöte zu spielen (1791). Translated by Linda Bishop Hartig. A Translation and Comparative study by L. B. Hartig. Ann Arbor MI: UMI Dissertation Information Services, 1991.
VESTER, Frans: Die Flötenspielpraxis zur Zeit der AMZ (1798-1848), und heute. Die Flöte in der „Allgemeine Musikalische Zeitung“ (1798-1848). Amsterdam: Broekmans & Van Poppel B. V., 1997. ISBN 90-71939-09-X
WENTZ, Jed, KROESBERGER, Willem: ΄Sonority in the 18th Century, un poco più forte?΄, Early Music, Vol. 22, No. 3 (August 1994), p. 482-495. Oxford University Press. Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3128090
Internet sources:
HAAS, Ole : Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung (2009). Source: https://ripm.org/index.php?page=JournalInfo&ABB=ALZ, Accessed on : September 30, 2019
The four parts are: a head-joint, an upper middle joint, a lower middle
joint and a foot-joint with one key (for D#/E b). At the beginning and the
first half of the 18th century traversos appeared first in three parts,
in models such as the Hotteterre flute. Later the middle joint was
divided into two parts. ↩︎
As Bruce Haynes calls this repertoire in his book The End of
Early Music: A period performer´s history of music for the
twenty-first century, it is a repertoire of epochs before Romantic
era. ↩︎
from Harnoncourt´s essay On the Interpretation of Historical
Music, p. 42. It was written in 1954, and was author´s first
written observation on the given topic, as he says himself in the
introduction to his book Music as Speech↩︎
from the German original Versuch einer Anweisung die Flöte
traversiere zu spielen, published in 1752. There are several
English translations and editions of the original method, therefore
the translated titles might vary slightly. The translation I am
using here is On Playing the Flute, second edition, transl. by
Edward R. Reilly. ↩︎
Johann Joachim Quantz (1697-1773) was a flautist, a composer, an
instrument maker, and an author of Versuch einer Anweisung die Flöte
traversiere zu spielen. ↩︎
All other treatises from the 16th-18th centuries that touch on
flute playing can be described as ‘methods’ rather than musical
compendia of the sort Quantz wrote. Compare Agricola (1545),
Mersenne (1636) Hottetterre (1707), Corrette (1773), De Lusse (ca.
1760), Tromlitz (1791) - which comes closest in scope, and Devienne
(1794). ↩︎
Quantz: On playing the Flute, chapter XI, par. 14 ↩︎
Passions, based on a theory of affects – or affections – were a part of aesthetics in baroque music and art. They are based on human emotions, and their expression through music was an essential part of music aesthetics and practice of the time. ↩︎
Quantz: On playing the Flute, chapter XI, par. 21 ↩︎
In my understanding, there is a difference between being moved by
the passion and being overwhelmed by the passion. As performers, if
we get overwhelmed, it might have an influence on the quality of our
music performance, however, our technique can “hold” us, thus this
performance will just depend upon a particular situation. ↩︎
Charles De Lusse (1720-1774) was a French flutist, composer and
author of L´Art de la flûte traversière. ↩︎
From L´Art de la flûte traversière (The Art of the Transverse
Flute), written and published in ca. 1761, paragraph (Y) Du Piano
et Du Forte (On Piano and Forte), original text translated by Kat Carson ↩︎
Quantz: On playing the Flute, chapter IV, par. 3 ↩︎
Johann George Tromlitz ((1725-1805) was a German flute virtuoso,
flute-maker and writer, based in Leipzig. ↩︎
From a German original Unterricht die Flöte zu spielen, written
in 1791, was designed after Quantz´s treatise Versuch… (1752),
presents a detailed pre-classical look at performance practice and
design of the flute. According to the translator of Tromlitz´s
treatise L. Bishop Hartig, the author attempted to write an
instruction book for learning how to play the flute without the help
of a teacher. ↩︎
Tromlitz: Unterricht die Flöte zu spielen, transl. by L. Bishop
Hartig, p. 180 ↩︎
Quantz: On playing the Flute, chapter IV, par. 4 ↩︎
Tromlitz: Die Unterricht die Flöte uz spielen, transl. by L.
Bishop Hartig, p. 179 ↩︎
Jacques Martin Hotteterre le Romain (1674-1763) was a French
musician, an instrument maker, and a composer, who played various
woodwinds. He was a flutist of the king´s chamber and one of the most sought-after teachers of the
time. ↩︎
J.M. Hotteterre: Preface to Principles of the flute, recorder
and oboe, from the French original Principes de la Flûte
traversière, ou flûte d´Allemagne; de la flute à bec, ou flute
douce; et du haut-bois, a first known essay on flute playing,
published in 1707. It was intended for beginners on the instrument,
most of them probably amateur musicians. ↩︎
Hotteterre: Principles of the flute, recorder and oboe,
Introduction by D. Lasocki, p. 25 ↩︎
Tromlitz writes about this in detail in Chapter 6: About Tone
Quality and Pure Intonation, par. 4 and par. 6 ↩︎
I refer to ΄classical music΄ as a most common musical practice
nowadays, including a cross-section study of several historical
epochs, while all the repertoires are executed in a similar manner
– Modern style, as B. Haynes calls it (see 1.2.1 A brief history of
HIP and its performing styles). ↩︎
Haynes: The End of Early Music, chapter 2: Prophets of the
Revolution: Dolmetsch and Landowska↩︎
Recordings from the turn of 19th and 20th centuries, and early
20th century ↩︎
Vester´s introduction is called Die Flötenspielpraxis zur Zeit
der AMZ (1798 – 1848), und heute (The flute playing practice at
the time of AMZ (1798-1848), and today) ↩︎
Der Allgemeine Musikalische Zeitung (AMZ) was a weekly journal
created by the publishing house of Breitkopf & Härtel, and existed
in the years 1798 to 1848. It was the first internationally esteemed
music journal. ↩︎
Frans Vester (1922-1987) was a performer on both modern and
historical flutes, editor, and scholar, and he is said to be one of
the most influential performers on historical flutes in the second
half of 20th century. He was a teacher of modern flute at the
Koninklijk Conservatorium in The Hague. ↩︎
Die Flöte in der „Allgemeine Musikalische Zeitung", p. XIII,
transl. by Dorota Matejová ↩︎
B. Kuijken (*1949), a performer and a pedagogue of historical
flutes, one of the most influential figures in traverso performance
in second half of 20th century. ↩︎
B. Kuijken: The Notation is Not the Music: Reflections on Early
Music Practice and Performance; chapters 6.Articulation and
7.Dynamics ↩︎
B. Kuijken: The Notation is Not the Music, p. 56 ↩︎
B. Kuijken: The Notation is Not the Music, p. 59 ↩︎
B. Kuijken: The Notation is Not the Music, p. 59 ↩︎
J. Wentz and W. Kroesberger: Sonority in 18th century, un poco
più forte?, Early Music, Vol. 22, No. 3 (Aug. 1994), p. 488 ↩︎
J. Wentz and W. Kroesberger: The sonority in 18th century, un
poco più forte?, p. 493 ↩︎
Tromlitz: Unterricht Die Flöte zu spielen, transl. by L. Bishop
Hartig, p. 184 ↩︎
Hotteterre: Principles of the flute, recorder and oboe, p. 45 ↩︎
Included in the appendix of De Lusse´s L´Art de la flûte
traversière↩︎
Tromlitz: Unterricht Die Flöte zu spielen, transl. by L. Bishop
Hartig, p. 183, par. 7 ↩︎
Tromlitz: Unterricht Die Flöte zu spielen, transl. by L. Bishop
Hartig, p. 182, par. 5 ↩︎
Tromlitz: Unterricht Die Flöte zu spielen, transl. by L. Bishop
Hartig, p.182, par. 6. ↩︎
Contemporary music – I refer here as to music covering the period from approximately 1950s until present, and exploring innovative ideas concerning sound and its organization ↩︎
H. Russcol – The Liberation of Sound: An Introduction to
Electronic Music (1972) ↩︎
Theobald Böhm (1794-1881) invented and patented the keyed-system
for woodwinds in 1847.The modern flute uses the same system until
today and in its construction is has barely changed since the middle
of 19th century. ↩︎
Robert Dick: THE OTHER FLUTE: A Performance Manual of
Contemporary Techniques↩︎
Gemolo: Extended techniques on the traverso: The case of the
glissando and the flattement, ÍMPAR, Online Journal for Artistic
Research, vol.2 no.2, 2018, p. 30 ↩︎
Gemolo: Extended techniques on the traverso: The case of the
glissando and the flattement, ÍMPAR, Online journal for artistic
research, vol.2 no.2, 2018, p.30 ↩︎
Gemolo: Extended techniques on the traverso: The case of the
glissando and the flattement, ÍMPAR, Online Journal for Artistic
Research, vol.2 no.2, 2018, p.30 ↩︎
Residual tone is a “by-product”, a tone heard alongside the
desired pitch of the harmonics. It often has a noise-like quality
and a weak sounding fundamental and its several overtones. ↩︎
De Lusse: L´art de la flûte traversière, p. 10, par. « Des Sons
Harmoniques » (The Harmonic Sounds), from French translated by Kat
Carson ↩︎
De Lusse: L´art de la flûte traversière, appendix Tablature Des
Sons Harmoniques↩︎
In the table, the symbol „° " next to the tone is a symbol used
for the sounding harmonic tone. The arrows ↓ and ↑ indicate if the
harmonic tone sounds lower or higher compared to its regularly
fingered pitch. The harmonic tones indicated in green are the
deviations from pitches that “should” sound. If there are two
harmonic sounds notated in one “box”, then the first one is for the
Beukers instrument, and the second one for Tutz instrument. ↩︎
Models: one-keyed W. Beukers flute made by Simon Polak (a=415
Hz); one-keyed J. H. Rottenburgh flute made by R. Tutz (a=415 Hz);
one-keyed Hotteterre flute made by “unknown” (a=392 Hz) ↩︎
Most of modern-day replicas of traversos are built in 415 Hz due
to the standardized pitch requirement in early music performance.
However, most of the original instruments were built in ca. 400 Hz.
Therefore the modern-day measurements calculated for 415 Hz
influence the general tuning and tone colour of current traverso
replicas. ↩︎
For example, Bordet Touissant : Méthode raisonnée pour apprendre
la musique (ca. 1755) and M. Corrette : Méthode pour apprendre
aisément à jouer de la flûte traversière (ca. 1735-1740) ↩︎
Gemolo: Extended techniques on the traverso (part 2): the case of
the flutter-tonguing and microtones in the post-modernist repertoire
for the one-keyed flute, ÍMPAR Online journal for artistic
research, vol. 3, No. 1, 2019, p. 14 ↩︎
Also known as “finger vibrato”, in 18th century used as an
ornament, especially on long tones ↩︎
Gemolo: Extended techniques on the traverso (part 2): the case of
the flutter-tonguing and microtones in the post-modernist repertoire
for the one-keyed flute, ÍMPAR Online journal for artistic
research, vol. 3, No. 1, 2019, p. 18 ↩︎
Gemolo: Extended techniques on the traverso (part 2): the case of
the flutter-tonguing and microtones in the post-modernist repertoire
for the one-keyed flute, ÍMPAR Online journal for artistic
research, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 14 ↩︎
Gemolo, Extended techniques on the traverso: The case of the
glissando and the flattement, ÍMPAR, Online journal for artistic
research, vol.2 no.2, 2018, p. 31 ↩︎
A. B. Fürstenau: Die Kunst des Flötenspiels, Op. 138, p. 84 ↩︎
symbol taken from R. Dick: The Other Flute, p. 128 ↩︎
A type of score used in contemporary music, where instead of
traditional notation, a composer gives written instructions for the
performer. Often, in this type of scores, much depends upon
performer´s creative approach and deeper understanding of the idea
behind the piece. ↩︎
Please note, that for copyright reasons the full score of Anspielungen is not included here. For analysis of this piece I am using the score by edition Schott. ↩︎
Konrad Hünteler (born 1947) is a German flautist and conductor.
Among others he was a student of Hans-Martin Linde whose
Anspielungen is dedicated to Hünteler. ↩︎
composer describes them in the Performance Directions↩︎
An allusion is to - J.S. Bach: Sonata No. 5 in E minor for flute
and continuo, BWV 1034, I. Adagio ma nontanto, bar 21 ↩︎
An allusion to C.P.E. Bach: Sonata in A minor for Unaccompanied
Flute, I. Poco Adagio, bar 58-59 ↩︎
G. Ph. Telemann: Twelve Fantasias for Flute without Bass, TWV
40:2-13 ↩︎
An allusion to C.P.E. Bach: Sonata in A minor for Unaccompanied
Flute, I. Poco Adagio, bar 92 ↩︎
J.S. Bach: Partita in A minor for Solo Flute, BWV 1013, 1.
Allemande, bar 46 ↩︎
„Prepared piano" is often used in contemporary music. It means
that the instrument is “adjusted” or “prepared” in a way, that
different small objects are inserted in between the instrument´s
strings (e.g. piece of paper, small objects, etc.) in order to allow
different sounds for certain keys or group of keys of the piano. ↩︎
Serialism is a compositional technique employing a set (a
„series") of fixed tones, usually the twelve tones of the chromatic
scale, or its sections. ↩︎
The name is derived from the white keys of the piano. ↩︎
Gemolo: Extended techniques on the traverso: The case of the
glissando and the flattement, ÍMPAR, Online Journal for Artistic
Research, vol.2 no.2, 2018, p.31 ↩︎
De Lusse: L´art de la flûte traversière, p. 10, par. Z ↩︎
In treatises by Hotteterre, De Lusse, Quantz, etc. ↩︎
De Lusse: L´art de la flûte traversière, p. 8, par. L, M, N, O ↩︎
Hotteterre: Principles of the flute, recorder and oboe, chapter 9 ↩︎
Tromlitz: Die Unterricht die Flöte uz spielen, transl. by L.
Bishop Hartig, p. 351,353 ↩︎
Gemolo, Extended techniques on the traverso: The case of the
glissando and the flattement, ÍMPAR, Online journal for artistic
research, vol.2 no.2, 2018, p. 30 ↩︎
M. P. de Montèclair (1667-1737): ΄Pan et Sirinx - Cantata IV
for voice, and violin or oboe or flute΄ from the Second Book of
΄Cantates à voix seule et avec simfonie΄, published in 1706 ↩︎