“The predominance of abstract designs over audibility of their sonorous results is the basic problem in post-war modernist music [Harley, 1998a]. “
The development of electronic processes which could dynamically move sounds through space encouraged composers such as Stockhausen to attempt similar dynamic processes in instrumental spatial music. In “Musik in Raum”, Stockhausen suggests that spatial distribution could be used to structure and articulate different layers of material, thereby avoiding the homogenous pointillistic textures common to many twelve-tone compositions. In many respects, this is similar to Brant’s
and he criticized Gruppen as not really being spatial because “all the orchestras have brass, woodwinds, and percussion, so the direction and the tone quality cannot indicate the source of the material [Harley, 1997]”. However, this criticism is not entirely justified as Stockhausen is clearly using the spatial distribution of the
musicians to articulate different layers of material, albeit with similar instrumentation. While the delineation of spatial locations with different timbres may be necessary when many disparate layers of material are operating concurrently, such as in the music of Henry Brant, this is not necessarily required when each group produces intermittent, rhythmically and harmonically distinct passages of music, as in the moment to moment form typically employed by Stockhausen.
One of the most contentious aspects of Stockhausen’s treatise on spatial music was his proposal for the serialization of direction based upon the division of a circle into a series of proportions. Critics argue that the absolute directions specified on paper will not be perceived by the audience [Harrison, 1999; Harley, 1998a], and the tests discussed earlier in this thesis would seem to support this view. The results of these tests illustrate the significant variations in perceived source direction which occur with electronic spatialization systems and suggest that a reliable and absolute perception of direction is difficult to achieve electronically. This problem is
exacerbated in a performance setting when the audience is seated at different locations within the loudspeaker array. The apparent contradiction between the compositional design and the perceptible results in the music of Stockhausen, and other composers, is not only evident in their use of space, but also in other areas, as illustrated by the quote at the beginning of this section. Some composers questioned whether the equal division of parameters such as pitch, motion, duration and form on paper, translates to an equal division in the perception of the listener [Bernard, 1987]. The twelve-tone music of the Vienna school which preceded serialism had primarily focussed on a serialized pitch row which was, in theory at least, evident in the resulting pointillistic texture. By 1955, however, Stockhausen had begun to use these serialist procedures to control the overall character of large groups of material, in what he referred to as "group composition". In this aesthetic, it is questionable whether the audience is intended to perceive the absolute and tightly controlled internal relationships within the composition. Instead perhaps, it is the overall result of these procedures which is important. Serialism began as a negation of tonality, and serialist procedures serve to
purely negative goals could also be achieved by simply randomizing every parameter, yet the controlled bursts of activity in Kontakte or Gruppen sound anything but random. In effect, the serialist procedures eliminate any repetition, of pitches, rhythms or indeed spatial movements, while also maintaining a definite coherence in the audible material. In these works, direction is therefore divided into a series of proportions in the same way as every other parameter, and it is the consistency of this approach which produces the non-repeating, yet entirely coherent material in these works. The precisely specified spatial locations presented in “Musik in Raum” are therefore perhaps not intended to be perceived in an absolute sense, but rather as a way to remove any recognizable or re-occurring spatial motifs. Stockhausen therefore uses space to create a sense of perspective in the listener which is not in fact fixed, as in the classic concert listening experience, but varying. This approach ties in with the composer’s overall aesthetic in which the music is similarly removed from a definite tonal, harmonic or rhythmical centre [Cott, 1973].
Stockhausen’s use of space, particularly in his early career, suggests that the composer was well aware of the perceptual issues with his approach. “Musik in Raum” contains a detailed and relatively accurate assessment of the perception of auditory distance and also suggests that a perceptually appropriate scale of directions should be determined by listening tests. In a later interview, Stockhausen clearly recognizes the importance of the source material in terms of its perceived spatial movement:
“I can say in general that the sharper the sound and the higher the frequency, the better it moves and the clearer its direction. But I’d also say that the more a sound is chopped, the better it moves in space. And the sharper the attack of each segment of a sound event, the better it moves. Whereas a continuous or harmonious sound or a spectrum of vowels doesn’t move very well”. [Cott, 1973]
Stockhausen integrated certain spatial parameters, such as direction, speed and angular movement into the overall serial structure but other parameters such as
distance are used in a much more intuitive and indeed dramatic manner. For example, while the directional movements in Kontakte are serially controlled, distance is used to dramatically highlight certain climactic passages. Stockhausen’s theatrical and dramatic use of space is also evident in the Helicopter String Quartet (1995), which uses the sound of the quartet (who are distributed amongst the helicopters) is mixed with the sound of the helicopter rotors. Stockhausen’s sophisticated use of spatial
which Stockhausen was no stranger) which concentrate solely on the serial control of direction discussed in Musik in Raum. Consider the following statement:
"Stockhausen dismisses the use of space by Gabrieli, Berlioz, and Mahler as being too theatrical, and argues instead that direction is the only spatial feature worthy of compositional attention because it could be serialized. “[Harley, 1998a]
Although Stockhausen does state that direction is the only spatial parameter suitable for serialization, he clearly does not consider this to be “the only spatial feature worthy of compositional attention [Harley, 1998a] ”. As discussed previously in this Chapter, distance is used extensively in Kontakte and Gesang der Jünglinge but, as this parameter is highly subjective, and dependent on multiple parameters such as amplitude, timbre and the nature of the source signal, it is not suitable for serial control.
Stockhausen’s acoustic spatial music also displayed an awareness of the limitations of the medium. His use of spatial movement in Gruppen was one of the first attempts to replicate stereophony using acoustic instruments and is particularly successful in this regard due to the relative restraint displayed by the composer. Spatial movements are implemented, often in isolation, as short, distinct gestures, and this helps to clarify the perceived movement. A more complex spatial movement is in fact implemented only once in the dramatic and famous passage shown in Figure 8.4 where a single travelling chord rotates around the distributed brass instruments. The results of experiments presented in Chapter Six indicate that the presence of an additional distracting stimulus reduced the localization accuracy for the primary source [Blauert, 1997]. This suggests that when these spatial movements are isolated in this way, they are much more likely to be clearly perceived by the audience. However, if multiple complex trajectories are occurring simultaneously, it will be much harder for the listener to determine the precise trajectory of each source. In addition, the fragility of movements created using stereophonic processes has been clearly demonstrated and this too imposes perceptual limitations on the complexity of the spatialization process. It would therefore appear to be quite difficult to justify the elaborate and visually-orientated spatial schemes implemented by composers such as Varèse and Xenakis. Xenakis appeared to reach the same conclusion much later in his career, as evident in the following comment made by the composer in 1992.
“In reality, sound movements are usually more complex and depend on the
musicians playing one after another with amplitude changing in the same way that you change the levels in a stereo sound projection, sometimes it will work and sometimes it will not. It depends on the speed of the sound as well as on the angle of two loudspeakers or musicians, that is, on the relative position of the listener. These two considerations are equally important.
Xenakis “Music, Space and Spatialization, 1992: 6–7)
While the spatial movement of sound obviously lends itself to graphical geometrical representation, there is a danger in simply equating our visual perception with our audible perception. A visual representation of a circle is outside of time, in that the entire shape can be comprehended all at once, however, this is not the case when a sound is moved around the audience in a circular fashion. In this case, the perception of the sound “shape” will only become clear once the sound has moved through a full 360 degrees rotation. Creating a spatial counterpoint between different trajectories based on a graphical representation is therefore difficult, as the precise “shape” is not instantaneously clear as it is in the visual realm. Harley illustrates this problem in an analysis of the Genesis cycle (1962–3), a large-scale orchestral work by Henryk Gorecki. The chaotic and highly dissonant material in this piece is organized spatially into blocks of material, in a similar fashion to Brant and the group
compositions of Stockhausen. However, this piece also attempts to create geometric spatial trajectories using triangular, polygonal and rectangular arrangements of the orchestra, as shown in Figure 8.13. This elaborate seating plan necessitated the repositioning of the audience and performers before each of the three movements. However, Harley correctly suggests that the slight effect of the different layouts is far less important than the symmetrical movement of material from left to right, or from front to back [Harley, 1998a], which could be achieved with any of these
arrangements. The highly visual conception of spatial music envisaged by composers like Edgard Varèse and Iannis Xenakis is perhaps achievable when combined with a synchronized visual component. However, it is difficult to see how distinct sonic “shapes” can be reliably produced even in isolation, with either acoustic or electronic techniques. The creation of a spatial counterpoint between multiple shapes and trajectories appears even less realizable.
Fig. 8.13 Layout of instruments in Gorecki’s Genesis Cycle 1974
As mentioned earlier, the aesthetics of Musique Concrète and Elektronische Musik which developed in the 1950s can be used to illustrate two divergent
approaches to electronic music, and also to the use of space in music. The latter approach, which was discussed in the preceding Section, represents a continuation of traditional modes of composition in which abstract structuring systems are used to organize sounds and their position in space. The alternative approach, which has its origins in the work of Pierre Schaeffer, Pierre Henry and Musique Concrète, uses the sounds themselves as a starting point, and the large scale structure and spatial
distribution is derived from the intrinsic properties of the sounds. Over the past fifty years, this alternate approach has developed into a set of performance practices based upon the manual diffusion of a stereo source to a loudspeaker orchestra and this