Sea Bass v45

I'm finall getting around to publishing a piece I wrote with Professor Mark Applebaum last winter, Sea Bass v45, a tribute of sorts to his own Cat Fish.  I had a lot of fun working with Mark on this piece.  He and I have similar values but quite different perspectives regarding music.  Working with him forced me to confront some of my own ideas in ways that were perhaps less comfortable.  Yet I think this is precisely why I'm going to school. 

Why v45?  Well, it's kind of silly to include that in a title, but technically that is the name of the file on my Mac.  For some reason, version 44 didn't cut it and I needed one more iteration.  And why wasn't v33 or v34 perfect?  Who knows? 

I suppose if I delve into it a bit more, I started with the concept of metric modulation, where you start with a meter/tempo and then somewhat unperceptively modulate to an adjacent meter/tempo.  I wanted to use the technique to allow the piece to initially sound completely abstract and then somewhat surreptitiously modulate to some metrical structure and so you (the listener) would realize that the piece was less abstract or unstructured but only in retrospect.  I'd modulate then back to something more abstract (lacking any any metrical structure or reference), etc.  Mark wasn't convinced with these drafts, and I suppose I wasn't either.  Next I wondered if the structure might be more metrical but yet embedded in a way that was not obvious, so that I would keep the listener in a state of suspended and confused curiosity...   And eventually this required 45 revisions, hence v45.

Eventually (say v30), the structure of the piece relied on two techniques:  first, at a macro level, metric modulation to take you (the listener) in and out of focus of the structured vs the abstract; and second, at a micro level, metrical counterpoint.  I used three metrical strings, one of length 12, one of 13, and one of 14.  They are grouped into smaller units such as 1-2,1-2,1-2-3,1-2,1-2,1-2-3 [14].  Etc.  And so at one, the core of the piece is attempting to get your ear to lock into one of these strings and then migrate your ear to an adjacent line.  My assumption is that, all else equal, eventually your ear will go to the shortest string. 

Sea Bass v45 Score
Sea Bass v45 MP3

Bach WTC in F/f

Finally caved in and bought a Steinway.  It almost seems like a betrayal of Mr. Baller. He had a Bösendorfer 225 and Yamaha C7. He believed the Steinways had problems.  He would always ship his Bösendorfer around whenever he performed.

My first piano (other than the Knabe I grew up on in my mother's house) was a Yamaha S400 back in '92. I loved it -- still do. My second piano was a Bösendorfer 225. I spent some time at the factory outside Vienna testing several out, and finally picked the one I liked and shipped it to California in '00. When I built the second house in Wyoming, I shipped the Yamaha out there, where it remains. Eventually I picked up another second piano for the CA house, a used Baldwin, which I love -- I've always liked the older Baldwin pianos. Very sturdy. Well, when Smule opened up our new office in San Francisco, I decided to put the Baldwin up there, allowing friends from the company to play in our office. It's been great. And last week, I replaced the Yamaha/Baldwin as the second piano with a Steinway B. I haven't played the Bösendorfer since. It almost seems like we broke up.

I decided to try and record a couple new pieces on the Steinway. I think I would be better off recording on a broken down piano so that my technique and mistakes could be blamed on the instrument (including that missed F vs E-flat on the recap of the f-minor Prelude below).

Prelude in F major, Vol. 1, WTC
Fugue in F major, Vol. 1, WTC
Prelude in f minor, Vol. 1, WTC

Schubert Impromptu in F-minor D 935 No. 1

I've been spending more time at the keyboard the past few months. I don't know why I ever accept periods where I can't play every day. I realize how important spending time with the piano has always been to me.

My technique and voicing control remains a bit of a disaster. Yet I see a path forward. It will take many years. I am determined.

I'm performing before a jury panel at Stanford on Tuesday. Of the pieces I learned this quarter, I decided to focus on the first Impromptu from Schubert's second set, No. 1 in F-Minor. There could not be a more sublime creation in this world, excepting perhaps Schubert's Sonata in B-flat D 960 or maybe Chopin's 3rd Sonata. Technically I'm rationing these latter two pieces, lest I lose reason and purpose beyond my middle age.

My playing still suffers from the core issues of my life: always pushing forward toward a goal, yet never really taking the time to enjoy each moment along the way. There is never enough time it seems. Yet in music, I realize there always is plenty of time -- a realization that never manifests in any of my performances. Hence my own sonata which is an incessantly anguished push towards the end. And so, I have no pride over this recording, but retain it (like the others) to remember where I've been, as opposed to where I hope to go.

Impromptu in F-minor D 935 No. 1

(I didn't splice or remaster anything. This recording was the third and final take, all in the space of this evening. Indeed it is authentic, supposing that such a value applies to recordings).

Beta Collide performance of "not here, not now"

Thrilling to hear Beta Collide perform my new piece. Thank you, thank you Molly & Matthew.

I've included a reasonably high quality recording of the performance as well as the final score. The context for the concert, once more, was a series of pieces composed in response to Professor Mark Applebaum's "Theme in Search of Variations III". I chose to limit my piece to only two of the four ensemble members (flute and piano), in part because I wanted to focus on the resonance of the piano in this piece which would require a muted dynamic, but also I saw an opportunity to use the exercise as a means to justify writing a long-anticipated slow movement to my first piano sonata. The use of flute and piano in a piano sonata indeed has precedence!

The structure follows my other movements, but with an Applebaum twist. Mark's piece build on a structure of rotating ambiguity in time and space. In my piece, I adopt this same table, but create ambiguity around harmonic center. The hope is that in a very subtle and nuanced way, the resonance of the piano pulls the harmonic center down, up, or possibly reenforces that center. This harmonic center itself is somewhat ambiguous given the polytonal structure. A study of the score, however, would reveal certain pitches and harmonies that are re-enforced and implied by the open bass strings. The metric structure, following the form of my other movements, has the piano in five versus the flute in three. In the central dopio movemento, the briefly align on 4.

not here, not now
not here, not now score

Lento "not here, not now", from Sonata No. 1

Finished the slow movement of my sonata for a project at Stanford, namely a response to Mark Applebaum's Variations III.

Yes, this movement of the piano sonata requires a flute, or more specifically an alto flute. If Ives could, why can't I?

The piece is very much about the resonance of the piano, and the projected overtones of sustained and open strings, particularly those in the lower bass. The nuance suggests some ambiguity, whereby in some instances the flute line is bent sharp and other instances bent flat through the set of piano strings that remain open and sustained. The piece will vary, of course, by piano and tuning, which is part of the fun of the performance of the piece. Obviously it works best on the longest strings of a concert grand, and would be quite horrible on an upright.


Like the other movements of the sonata, this movement works with contrasting metrical structures, in this case the flute in 3 versus the piano in 5. Of course they come together in the middle stretto, both converging in 4.

The piece also applies the polytonal structure I've developed throughout the sonata. In this case, we have a progression in E Major against its retrograde in F minor and its inversion in F# minor. The middle section moves to G major and its retrograde in D minor. Etc.

Note that the mp3 here is horrific. Sibelius can't understand and project overtones, nor does it handle any of the flute quarter tones. Fortunately the piece will be performed by Beta Collide in a concert at Stanford on December 2nd. I'll update the blog with that recording when it becomes available.

not here, not now
not here, not now score

Another sad morning

Perhaps one too many of these mornings. Thank goodness for art, for music, and for Ravel.

Technique is getting quite rusty. Need to restructure my life so I, again, have more time for my piano.

Recorded a couple Ravel pieces with my iPhone, the Menuet last week and the Prelude this morning. Probably should have played it a second time as I missed a note the first time... Also, wanted to bring back my Prelude #12 to sit alongside these two Ravel pieces. I realize it's in a different league but, after sitting in the dust for five years, I still enjoy this piece.

Ravel: Prelude
Ravel: Mouvement de menuet, from Sonatine
My Prelude #12

Sonata No. 1 Maestoso, draft next

Is it possible to maintain Maestoso through a migration from the rhetorical to the anti-rhetorical? Beethoven maintains the cantabile throughout his Op 111, Arietta. Yet the piece seems to leave this world and its purported clarity. Is it possible to contemplate the retrograde of Ive's (or perhaps Schumann's) cumulative form? Is such a form nothing more than an embellishment of sonata form?

I've rewritten the second half of this piece. Virtually impossible to play now. I've taken out the bars. The 3:4 structure needs to stand on its own.

Sonata No. 1: Maestoso Score
Sonata No. 1: Maestoso