Questions and Answers

Q: What I find myself most curious about is...how you came about being so keen on what I’d call "static/cluster" oriented music. Of which isn't well worded, technically, but...I just mean, some of your work reminds me of Ligeti and Penderecki, yet...I don't think that's really much of an influence on your work. Has me curious.

A: I work very much by my own sense of harmony, really. I do like clusters and such, I enjoy the sonic richness that is to be found in clusters. Of late, I have been using clusters more within quieter, slower works And often times there are some very interesting sonic things to be found within clusters, like when you have two notes that are right next to each other in the standard 12-note scale, played together, you get interesting oscillations between the two, which almost create another note. In regards to such influences as Penderecki and Ligeti, I do admire the work of these composers, and of course, in some degree or another, my work is influenced by all I hear, as it is impossible not to be. But I do not wish to emulate any other composer, I wish to continue to create and develop my own distinct style, without direct reference to anyone else *see below*

Q: So you find it important to have your own "style", then? Why?

A: I mean....in regards to my style, that is where my experimentation comes in, as I am not using groundbreaking new computer programmes (nor am interested in doing so) or radical new score writing or re-inventing time or anything, it comes from my use of harmonies, relations of timbres and themes within my work. I do think it important to have my own style, yes. Something that is uniquely me, from my mind, heart and soul. I think because my end result is the important part for me, not the process, and a great part of that is having my own recognisable elements within that, for the end product to be truly mine. My style comes from my harmonic and sonic language, these are the important technical elements in my work and I wish to continue to explore and develop them, as I feel this is where my validity as an artiste lies. I believe that it is all a true artiste can do, to be true to themselves, and the art that they must produce, not to pander and compromise themselves and their art, producing something that is not truly what they wish to create. I do find my music has a constant undercurrent, that of the theme of the relationship between acoustic and electronic sounds. Whatever else is going on conceptually, emotionally, aesthetically etc, I always notice that in some way this relationship is addressed or explored. It just seems to me that for total freedom when composing, it makes sense to use each and every sound source available, whether from the electronic or acoustic field, or field recordings or…whatever you want to use, basically. I’m also interested in this because I like the sounds you can get from electronic means, but find it to be rather “cold”, and I like to warm that up with acoustic (especially harmonic) writing. Anyway, I do find it interesting that even if the concept of the piece has nothing to do with it, the relationship always turns up in some way or another.

Q: Where does music stand in the regards of being used as therapy? Such as...which emotions do you most find yourself tapping into when writing music?

A: I do use it as such, music as therapy, I mean...I use it as a means to express myself, my emotions, my past etc, which makes it sound self indulgent, but...the point is that I never reveal what emotion or event the writing of the piece relates to, thus allowing the listener to put their own spin on it. It means...whatever...to me, but...to the listener, could mean something else completely. And many times I don’t even know myself until after the time has past and I come back to it and get something out of it that I didn’t realise was there but makes absolute sense to me.

Q: What do these computer programmes and such that you use do?

A: There are 4 main programmes I use, which both perform different functions. For pre-recorded sound manipulation, I use peak, which is basically a list of plug-in effects, which you can use to affect the pre-recorded sound source you are using. It has such things as echo, phasers, flange etc, not much different from analogue effects in a lot of ways. Peak has a lot more experimental effects, which you can’t really create in the analogue field, plus a lot of d.s.p, like reverse, fades, time/pitch change etc. And also, it has a record function, although I do most of my recording on a digital 16 track, which I then transfer onto my computer via Pro-tools for building the piece. Pro-tools is also the programme I use to put together pieces, as it is a multi tracking programme, such as running fast and playing dead *see below*. The other programme I use is one for real time sound manipulation, called MAX/MSP. In this programme I build a patch, and within this patch, I set parameters, for how the sound will be affected, often using various vst plug-in effects. This programme is for use in live performances, to affect the sounds of acoustic instruments live (such as in angry concrete), as opposed to pre-recorded sounds. I also use the programme MetaSynth, which allows me to draw frequency maps and run various sound sources through them.

Q: So, how did you map out "running fast and playing dead"?

A: That was done using the film as reference to when certain events happen (at one point there is an image of an open mouthed man, I added a scream (Ned Flanders style) to the soundtrack here - tacky, I know, but that was the idea). Also, certain images and certain sounds went to together as the film is quite repetitive as regards actual material, but the treatment of said material is what changes throughout the film and is where the experimentation lies. I tried to match this with the music. So each scene would have a theme that would be apparent in the music, but also there were slight changes in the treatment of the theme. The samples come from string sounds, where I recorded not only pitch based passages of material, but as many different sounds as I could get from the instrument, not just the traditional way of playing, but also hitting the sound box, bowing the edge of the sound box, bowing bellow the bridge, scratching the strings and various other techniques in order to create a varied sound. I then affected these samples using Peak *see above* to create a somewhat harsh, but also haunting quality to the basic string sounds. The basic visual material is of a man running through woods, bare foot and in a tuxedo, seemingly running away from something (we never find out what) and in between these running scenes, there is footage of the man lying motionless, over a tree branch, by the river, etc. I wished for the audience to feel uneasy, through the mixture of the soundtrack and the visual material, to question whether this really IS just playing dead. The actual putting together of film and soundtrack was done in the programme Pro Tools, which is a multi-tracking programme. So using the film as one track, I could cut and paste and adjust timings of the music to fit precisely with the film, and because the quality of the film was (purposely) low, I matched this with a similar lo-fi sound.

Q: Morton Feldman was so fascinated by the timbre of an instrument (explorations thereof). Does any of this particular exploration interest you?

A: Absolutely, there is a lot you can do with the timbre of an instrument and I have done experiments with how the same material translates onto different instruments, thus changing the sound of the whole thing (i.e., the first few bars of angry concrete, the “opening out” theme, sung by 4 part choir). Also, just within the instrument itself there are many explorations to be done in regards to technique. For the horn I have developed my own style of "extended" technique, where the timbre is an important part of the music I write for it. I use various techniques to alter the timbre of the instrument, again often experimenting with the same material but different technique, to see how it is affected. This is part of my own style that I keep going on about, the relationships of timbres within a piece, the instruments used, and how they relate and interplay with each other. Plus the alteration of timbres by using electronic means opens up a whole new world of exploration. An interesting experiment I did in some ways relating to this, was taking an electro acoustic piece, and making it entirely acoustic, taking the pitch (frequency) and rhythmic information found in the electro acoustic piece, and mapping it onto acoustic instruments, thus changing the whole sound and feel of the piece, by changing the timbre of the electronic sounds to that of acoustic sounds, even though the basic information is the same.

Q: Which classical composer (and then to a lesser and lesser extent some other composers) would you cite as your greatest influence?

Debussy would have to be one of my greatest influences as being the composer who truly opened up the door to modern classical music. I love his dreamscape style of music and there are certainly elements of this in my own work. His work combines all the elements I find important in art, a mixture of beauty, emotion and intelligence. Also John Cage is tied in term of influence (albeit in a different way) with Debussy as without him and his concept of all sound is music, modern classical music as it is today wouldn’t exist. There are many concepts of Cage that I don’t agree with, but the influence of 4’33” is huge. Varese falls into this category also, as someone who saw music in everything, although it was very late in his life that the means for him to realise his ideas were invented. Then there are composers who are working in similar fields to myself, with instruments and electronics, and the hybridisation of these, such as Kaija Saariaho, Karlheinz Stockhausen, Zeena Parkins etc. Then there are the 20th century composers such as Gloria Coates, Lutoslawski, Takemitsu, Feldman, Penderecki, Ligeti, Webern, Shostakovich, Nono, Dutilluex, Xenakis, Rebecca Saunders, the list goes on, people whose work I find contains all the elements I look to include in my own work. I should say I mention these composers because I feel I have some interest and similarities with their concepts and ideas of music as an expressive art form, as well as technical aspects, and not because I am interested in expanding their research, or following what they have done before.

Q: How would you describe your compositional method?

I guess the best way to describe the way I compose is “building with sound”. I first decide what I want to build, work out a blueprint, and then begin gathering the materials (sounds). I then put these sounds together in a way that makes sense and sounds good and interesting to me. I also work in layers, so have a foundation layer which contains the bare bones, then another layer filling in more detail, then another layer with more detail etc until it’s done. When I compose the sections of harmonic, instrumental writing that I use within my work (whether for use within an electronic piece or for an entirely acoustic piece) I do it in a similar manner, working out a blueprint, then working in layers. I write this intrumental stuff straight onto manuscript paper. I can’t compose using a piano, isn’t natural for me, so I write down what I think works for me and then adjust it as necessary when it comes time to record it.

Contact