Rain Spell and Derive - is there a connection?

Have you ever noticed the intriguing resemblance between Toru Takemitsu's "Rain Spell" and Pierre Boulez's "Derive"? It's quite astonishing to think that Boulez composed his work merely a year after Takemitsu's piece premiered in Japan. Could it be possible that Boulez had heard Takemitsu's work before creating "Derive"? We may never have concrete answers. Yet, it is not uncommon for two individuals to independently explore similar ideas without knowledge of each other's endeavors.

The most striking connection lies in the instrumentation of Takemitsu's "Rain Spell": Flute, Clarinet, Harp, Piano, and Vibraphone. Boulez's "Derive" follows a similar path with flute, clarinet in A, vibraphone, piano, violin, and cello. The notable difference lies in the addition of violin and cello, perhaps to achieve a balanced string timbre. While the harp serves as an intermediary instrument in Takemitsu's work, the piano assumes that role in Boulez's composition. It is worth mentioning that the tuning of the harp evokes a touch of "far-eastern mysticism," resembling the sounds of traditional Japanese instruments like the Koto or its Chinese cousin, the Guzheng. Hence, it is not solely the instrumentation that draws parallels.

Spring Mountain performed on Guzheng.

Both composers employ rising scales and prolonged notes, particularly trills, in a similar manner, creating a shared sonic aesthetic. This convergence of instrumentation and technique contributes to a semblance in their musical language. At times, one could easily mistake a passage from one piece for the other. Nevertheless, Boulez's composition exhibits a more pronounced abstract structure, embarking on a precise and deliberate journey. In contrast, Takemitsu's "Rain Spell" takes the listener on a dreamy and meandering expedition, captivated by the present moment.

Upon discovering that Takemitsu's composition predates Boulez's "Derive" by approximately a year, I was taken aback. The publishing dates confirm this fact, although we cannot determine when each composer began working on their respective pieces. If one of them indeed had the opportunity to hear the other's creation beforehand, it is plausible to assume some form of influence. The truth remains elusive, leaving us to ponder and for you to draw our own conclusions.

I urge you to immerse yourself in both compositions, explore their intricate tapestries, and unravel the mysteries that lie within.

Rain Spell- Tori Takemitsu

Derive - Pierre Boulez

What is Stockhausen's legacy?

Karlheinz Stockhausen is one of the most important composers of the post war era. He is partially responsible for the creation of the post war modernist music. But what is his true legacy? Was he the leading composer in his field? Did he invent the 'timbralist' idea of generating music from a single sound? Well, he did accomplish that concept with "Stimmung'' (Voice) which is completely designed around the single chord of a B flat ninth . But he wasn't the first. Giacinto Scelsi wrote "Quatro pezzi per orchestre" which is based a single note per movement and that work was written in 1959. Quatro pezzi per orchestre - Scelsi I seriously doubt whether Stockhausen knew about Scelsi's achievement when he wrote Stimmung in 1977. Perhaps one of his greatest works is " Gruppen'' (Groups) composed for three orchestras. Did it change the way we use the orchestra? He was a pioneer, especially in the early stages of hi

In the shadow of a genius.

Recently, I have discovered a fascinating revelation about the composers we admire so much. That behind many geniuses, there usually is a predecessor lurking in the background. It reminds of that often quoted phrase by Picasso A good artist borrows and great artist steals Now, I am not suggesting that the composers who I mention are stealing peoples' ideas - there is no evidence to support that fact. However, I am suggesting that the idea of a genius who came from nowhere may not be accurate. Let's take the case of Ernest Fanelli. Who? You might ask. He is a significant but unknown person in the development of impressionism. He is an Italian born composer living in Paris. He composed a good deal of 'new' music at the end of the nineteenth century. His ideas were quite radical; his instrumentation included harmonics, sul pont., he used wordless choruses. Unfortunately, he wasn't as talented a composer as Debussy and his music wasn'

Helmut Lachenmann

H elmut Lachen mann is relatively unknown outside of Germany. Nevertheless , h e is a figure wh o is growing in significan ce in modern music circles. Despite his wide experience, h is lack of broad appeal is, in my opinion, largely d ue to the individuality o f his music. He is not easy to categori se in an era which is dominated by trends and cliches. A simple way of describing his music is... *"musique concrète instrumentale". The notion is the creation of a subtlety of transformation of timbre, a manipulation of a continuum from sound to noise, from pitched notes to pitchless textural exploration, and all that in the sphere of (mostly) purely instrumental music. That means that in Lachenmann's music, there's a world of sound that rivals and even surpasses what electronic and electro-acoustic composers can achieve. -Guardian. Essentially , he is a acoustic composer writing electronic sounding music. He is somewhere in-between the timbra

Modern Music

Search This Blog