RE: [microsound] process [was :new autechre]

[vze26m98 <vze26m98@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Paulo Mouat wrote on 5/8/05:

>Well, that article merely uses the 2nd Viennese school as context and
>starting point for his own stress on outside-time structures.

>If what Xenakis said was on the verge of becoming outdated in 1955, it
>was certainly so in 1967--but as I mentioned above, I wouldn't say
>that by this time he was still trying to warn everybody of the
>deadendedness of serialism, just using a common and well-known example
>to springboard his argument.

>(although I find it an interesting piece); Stockhausen never engaged
>in strict integral serialism, although the concept of the series and
>tone row is prevalent in the works of the time but yet one can't say
>that a serial work as e.g. Klavierstuck I (1952) could be achieved by
>stochastic sound clouds and masses--in fact, he was already making use
>of the concept of 'group' in that piece; same for Ligeti, which in
>1958 was saying "serial music was doomed to the same fate as all
>previous kinds of music. At birth it already contained the seeds of
>its own dissolution"

Hi Paulo-

I guess I should be more precise. The commonly known version of "Vers
une metamusique" was published in '67 with that introduction added.
Xenakis had previously presented the Sieves theory with introductions
tied to world music, and even earlier, Olivier Messiaen. So the comments
must have been relevant to Xenakis at the time.

He singles out three contemporary currents in music for criticism:
information theorists, those involved in Happenings, and those who rely
on improvisation. The Happenings allusion likely means Cage, and I'd
point out that whatever Stockhausen's attitude to serialism might have
been at the time, "Mantra" might place him in Xenakis' improvisor camp
as late as 1971, no? I'm really not familiar enough with Stockhausen and
Boulez to comment further...

His actual reference to serialism is generalized as "linear thought
(polyphony)" and Xenakis situates it in 1954 by referring to the
Gravesaner article. His critique is that:

"In general they remain ignorant of the substratum on which they found
this or that theory of action."

And that his concept of stochastic music, "this new, mass-conception
with large numbers was more general than linear polyphony, for it could
embrace it as a particular instance (by reducing the density of the
clouds)."

So, in effect, Xenakis IS making the claim that Klavierstuck I, to cite
your example, could have been achieved via his proposals. But I'll leave
others to judge the claim.

Best,

<vze26m98@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org