The Creation and Realization Process for Different Same

The Creation and Realization Process for Different Same

Individual Report

Pedram Diba (Northwestern University)

My goal during the Space As Timbre project was to use Orchidea, a computer-assisted orchestration package in MAX MSP, and the creativity and practical knowledge of instrumentalists to recreate - with the medium of an acoustic ensemble - the timbral effects of various acoustic spaces applied to particular target sounds. The application of acoustic environments onto the sounds was achieved with the employment of various impulse responses. The use of impulse responses can alter what Denis Smalley refers to as the spectral space (Smalley 2007), and consequently the timbre of a sound. As a result, we can achieve various timbral qualities in a sound by changing its space.

Initially, I started with twelve sounds, which were all unique in nature - sustained sounds, short sounds, sounds with an attack-decay form, grainy and textural sounds, etc. - and 402 impulse responses. I experimented with all possible pairings of impulse responses and sounds to find what combinations could create the most interesting results for me. Eventually, I chose two sounds and four impulse responses. The first sound was the recording of a marble bouncing on a balloon that was stretched over the opening of a jar. The second sound was the bell recording that was available in the Orchidea package. Ultimately, I was able to apply two different impulse responses to each sound and create four target sounds for experimentation with Orchidea and the ensemble.

While working with Orchidea in preparation for the first workshop, I used the FullSOL2020 instrumental dataset to have Orchidea consider a diverse set of playing techniques in the orchestration solutions. With this dataset, Orchidea generates more compelling results in terms of timbre compared to other instrumental datasets such as the tinySOL. After choosing my dataset, I experimented with the parameters of sparsity and partialsfiltering to achieve the closest timbral result to the target sound. I also experimented with the parameters of onsetthreshold and onsettimegate to achieve the best outcome for a dynamic orchestration. If the time gate interval for the onset segmentation was short, Orchidea would generate a lot of material, but the identity of the sound would be lost. If the time gate interval was longer, I would get less material, but the identity of the sound was better preserved in the orchestration solution. I tried to find a fine balance between the four mentioned parameters in Orchidea for each of my target sounds to retain some of their identity features in a dynamic orchestration most important of which was the timbral quality.

Orchidea was a very powerful tool for providing orchestration solutions and compositional ideas to me; however, I also employed my intuition as a composer during the process. For example, sometimes I could hear a timbral quality in a target sound that I was interested in, but not all the solutions from Orchidea would highlight that timbral quality. In those moments, I chose a solution that was timbrally close to the target sound and hoped to explore more solutions with the ensemble during the workshops.

In preparation for the first workshop, I made some adjustments to the solutions provided by Orchidea. Some of these adjustments included adding glissandi, continuing particular articulations, adding arrows to indicate a gradual shift from one form of playing to another, accelerating and decelerating some figures, unison tremolo on two adjacent strings, etc. All these modifications served to create more smooth transitions in terms of timbre, pitch, and activity between the different segmentations as well as providing timbral augmentation. Since the piano is not included in the FullSOL2020 instrumental dataset, Orchidea did not provide any material for the piano. For the first workshop, I decided not to write anything for the piano either. I asked the pianist to generate some suggestions during the workshop while listening to the target sounds and the ensemble and reading the solution that was provided for the rest of the instruments.

Throughout the three workshop sessions, I made various modifications to the orchestration solutions with the help of the ensemble members. Some of these modifications included changing some of the pitches and dynamic markings as well as altering some playing techniques to get closer to the timbral quality of the target sounds. Some of the technique alterations included using half-tone sound instead of air sound in the flute, molto sul tasto with half hair in the violin instead of CLT, and continuous bouncing of the bow (ricochet) instead of tremolo in the double bass. We also explored new playing techniques such as performing vocal fry into the bass flute, rubbing a coin on the bass strings of the piano, clarinet key clicks, and simultaneously playing and singing a quarter tone apart in the low register of the flute. Exploration of new techniques helped us find some experimental techniques that even the FullSOL2020 instrumental dataset in Orchidea could not have suggested.

For the last workshop, I edited the orchestration of all my target sounds based on the annotations provided by the ensemble members after the first two workshops. I also tried to edit the orchestration solutions further based on what I had already observed and learned during the workshops. For example, I noticed that the presence of air sound can create a sense of spaciousness in the timbral quality of a sound. Therefore, I decided to add an airy multiphonic in the bass flute for one of the marble sounds that had a very reverberant and spacious quality. By doing so, I hoped to provide timbral augmentation based on what was taking place in other instruments and create an overall sense of spaciousness in the sound. During the third workshop we experimented with two different multiphonics to find the best option for the execution of this effect.

After the workshops, I created a formal plan for my piece. During this process, I had to consider - in each sound - the pitch organization and the central pitch, timbral qualities such as brightness, orchestration, etc., to decide in which order I wanted the sounds to appear as well as how the music would continue from one sound to the next. Based on my observations, I planned to have the marble sounds first, followed by the bell sounds. Additionally, I decided not to start the piece with the marble sounds, but rather compose my way to the first marble sound, which in the final work appears at minute 1:25.

During the composition phase, I focused on the timbral qualities of the impulse responses and tried to recreate those qualities in the final work. In his article "Sonic Imprints: Instrumental Resynthesis in Contemporary Composition" Nicolas Donin talks about the notion of referential dimension and identity in a sound and how the process of resynthesis can affect them. He argues that regardless of what the sound referent might be, the illusion may not be perfect enough for the listener to recognize the reference. Despite this, source content awareness can help a listener perceive the illusion of the referential dimension of a resynthesized sound. Resynthesis can also affect the identity of a sound. However, a sound can retain certain essential features that define its identity even if identity is not the primary concern through the resynthesis process (Donin 2015). During the composition phase, I was not concerned with the referential dimension of the target sounds in my piece, but rather their timbral identities, which resulted from the application of the impulse responses. Nonetheless, familiarity with the source content can help one recognize the target sounds in Different Same.

While listening to the premiere performance of the piece, I both noticed and didn’t notice the change of space in the formal structure of the work. Since the target sounds do not appear one after another in the composition, it was difficult to feel a change of space between them. However, the overall change of timbre within the large formal structure of the work was clear to me. In addition to using the target sounds, I also attempted to create various changes of space in small formal structures throughout the work. Since these changes take place much faster, the perception of change in space is more noticeable. For example, in mm. 54-57 (second marble sound) the orchestration portrays an open and reverberant space. However, once all the instruments drop out in m. 58 and the violin continues by itself, I perceive the space to become much smaller and dryer. Other similar examples in the small formal structure are mm. 1-4 or mm. 4-13 where the sound keeps getting brighter, giving a sense that the source is getting closer in space.

Overall, I found this experience to be very inspiring, and I learned a great deal about approaching space in instrumental music. I found the method of using the timbral qualities of sounds in different spaces to create the formal structure of a piece to be effective for me. Additionally, it was reassuring to see that on occasions where the time between two events with different spatial qualities was short, the change of space could be noticeable. For future works, I would be interested to incorporate the change of spatial qualities in a more connected manner between the large formal structure and the small formal structures.               

Program Note

Different Same

This work explores how the space we put a sound in can affect how we perceive that sound. Poetically, we can also see the influence of space in our lives: various aspects of our environment and the space we are put in, such as family, home country, hometown, historical and political aspects, socioeconomic status, language, schools, etc., can directly impact how we perceive our world.

References

• Bachelard, Gaston. (1969). The Poetics of Space. Boston: Beacon Press.

• Cella, Carmine Emanuele. (2012). Workshop on Computer-assisted orchestration and Orchidea. Ircam, streaming video. YouTube.

• Donin, Nicolas.(2015). “Sonic Imprints: Instrumental Resynthesis in Contemporary Composition.” In Musical Listening in the Age of Technological Reproduction, 323–44. Farnham: Ashgate.

• Smalley, Denis. (2007). “Space-Form and the Acousmatic Image.” Organised Sound: An International Journal of Music Technology 12, no. 1: 35–58.