Chapter 6 Discussion

This chapter will discuss the result of my research, reflections, thoughts and end with possible

ways of advancing research in this field.

6.1 Discussion

The aim of this master’s project has been to gain a better understanding of form in

electroacoustic music composition, and to apply this knowledge in studio-based work as well

as in compositions for acoustic instruments. In my understanding, these goals have been met,

and I have developed as a composer in my understanding and experience of dealing with

form. This experience and understanding of form have been applied into how I compose

music, and it has changed the way I work in all phases of the compositional process.

6.1.1 Answering research questions

The first research question was: What methods and strategies are used to create form in

electroacoustic music? This question doesn’t really have a finite answer, a composer will

figure out their own way of creating form, it comes with experience and changes depending

on the idea for the composition. The theoretical approach to form, found in Roads (2015),

regarding approaches such as Multiscale planning, top-down and bottom-up approaches, that I

describe in chapter 3.4, have been helpful in developing methods for deliberately thinking

about how to structure the music, instead of only relying on intuition. At the same time, I see

intuition as an essential component, and being too rigid in following form sketches is not a

good approach. The theories of Roads (2015) are in my opinion closely related to how

classical form is approached by Schoenberg (1967), as can be seen in my chapter 3.2.5

providing examples of how-to perspective on classical form may be reflected in

multistructural thinking. Hence, I argue, that how form is organized in classical music is still

present and valid when composing electroacoustic or acoustic music still today.

An approach that I learned from Jens Hedman during our interviews is to place events (sound

objects or bigger parts that could be seen as mesoform) in a timeline representing the

macroform, and then compose the bits between these events. This approach is similar to what

my teacher Fredrik Högberg likes to use, which he calls Islands and Bridges. Using this

approach, he composes different themes, refers to them as islands, and then later connects

them by composing the bridges. In the piece by Karlsson that I analyzed, a minimalist

approach was used, and he worked entirely with intuition on that composition, as I learned

from my interviews with him. Roads, in the creation of Now (2003), worked with focus on the

microstructure and created the entire composition from one pulse sound. Having the same

sound or sound quality repeated serves to create a functional form in a composition. The key

thing here is that the music is not perfectly repeated but has slight variations all the time, as

can be heard in Karlsson’s composition. Roads only makes rather drastically different

variations, so you don’t really get the effect of repetition, but coherence is instead achieved by

the sound objects all coming from the same sound source.

Other approaches to formal organization, that I didn’t have time to fully explore in this

research project, are algorithmic, aleatoric, generative and process driven methods. Neither 

did I have time to work with Moment form, but all of these are possible ways of thinking and

constructing form in a composition.

My second question is: What approaches to form I use in my electroacoustic compositions, to

obtain logical and structurally coherent musical results? This question is answered in the

answer to my first research question. Since all of the methods mentioned there would be

possible for me to use, but the approach that I feel works best for me as a composer is the

multiscale planning method. Depending on the nature of the piece to compose, I may apply a

top-down or a bottom-up approach, when in the early stages of composing. The multiscale

planning method allows me to consider the entirety of the composition, and all of the

structural levels, at the same time. The flexibility that this method offers is very appealing to

me, and allows more space for creativity, while at the same time providing more structured

ways of composing.

The third and final question was: What approaches to form in electroacoustic music can I use

in my compositions for acoustic instruments and in mixed media works? My answer, they are

all relevant. What I have learned through this project is that I don’t differentiate how I look

and think about form when I’m working in different genres of music. It is the instrumentation

of the composition that dictates what is technically possible to do with the form. For instance,

the technique of using crossfade, that is common for electroacoustic music, wouldn’t be

possible in a piece for solo flute, but in an orchestral piece or even a piece for solo piano it

would be possible. My research has developed how I think and construct form across all

musical genres, and to have the focus on form in electroacoustic music has made a huge

impact on my compositional techniques overall. Thinking of form in different temporal

planes, and divided in the structural levels of micro, sound object, meso and macroform is

new to me. Learning this has made me think completely different about form, and has made

me better prepared to construct large scale works, while also improving my techniques for

shaping the smaller details.

6.1.2 Fibonacci, Golden Ratio

Working with the Golden Ratio as a base for creating form gives a special sense of balance

and proportions in the music. At the same time, I feel connected somehow to something

higher and mystical, and this could be why there is so much mysticism around the Golden

Ratio. A problem that I have experienced with using the Golden Ratio is when composing

acoustic music, the notated bars don’t correspond to the actual time when the Golden Ratio is

applied. By examining my piece, A Rondo of Nostalgic Memories, the piece is 138 measures

long and the calculated time by the notation program Sibelius is 509 seconds. By doing the

equation for calculating where the Golden Ratio we get these results:

138 x 0,618 = 85,284

509 x 0,618 = 314,562

By calculating the bars, we get that the Golden Ratio is, with minor adjustment to whole

numbers, at bar 85. 314,562 adjusted to 315 seconds would correspond in the score to bar 91,

without adjustment the Golden Ratio would land on the last quarter note in bar 90.

Interestingly enough, I have by accident introduced changes in the texture at bar 90, celli are

changing note on the last quarter note and the vibraphone starts to play on the last eight note.

In bar 85, the C section of this piece starts, that’s also a very interesting coincidence since I

have not used the Golden Ratio in any form when composing this piece.

Since I find these coincidences interesting, I decided to look into my other acoustic pieces for

this project. My composition Dreams of Zapping Televisions is 170 bars, and Sibelius says it

takes 450 seconds to perform the piece. The calculation for the Golden Ratio gives these

results:

170 x 0,618 = 105,06 ≈ Bar 105

450 x 0,618 = 278,1 ≈ 278 seconds

The phi moment when looking at bars happens at bar 105 and in the score, this is during the

micro polyphony, development section of the composition. There is a chord change happening

at that bar, but not anything really climactic. When looking at the seconds the phi moment

would occur at bar 110 4:38 minutes into the piece. This is still in the micro polyphony part of

the composition and there is nothing really out of context or climactic about that part either.

So, in this piece I would say that I didn’t get any coincident at the phi moment.

With my piece Det oumbärliga slutet, in three movements, I thought it would be interesting to

look at it movement by movement and also at the composition in its entirety. Here, I was also

able to compare the timing of the Sibelius-file to the timing of the actual performance of the

piece. I only looked at the piano part, since the tape is mostly atmospheric sounds meant to be

in the background. The number of bars in the performance is 212, since Anders Englund who

performed it made one repeat in the end. The score is 206 bars with an open-ended repetition

of the last six bars. The Sibelius file is 10:46 minutes, which equals 646s and the actual

performance is 13:27 minutes long, equal to 807s. The duration and bars for each movement

is as follows:

Sibelius/score:

Regn och åska, 78 bars, 2:31 min = 151s

Nästan polska, 58 bars, 1:55min = 115s

Det oumbärliga slutet, 70 bars, 6:20s = 380s

Performance:

Regn och åska, 78 bars, 3:03 min = 183s

Nästan polska, 58 bars, 1:53min = 113s

Det oumbärliga slutet, 76 bars, 8:31s = 511s

The phi moment for the composition and separate movements would be the following:

Sibelius/score:

Complete composition: Bar 127, 6:39min

Regn och åska: Bar 48, 1:33min

Nästan polska: Bar 36, 1:11min

Det oumbärliga slutet: Bar 43, 3:55min

Performance:

Complete composition: Bar 131, 8:19min

Regn och åska: Bar 48, 1:53min

Nästan polska: Bar 36, 1:10min

Det oumbärliga slutet: Bar 47, 5:16min

Looking at where the phi moments correspond to the music, we can see that in the notated

score in Sibelius we land for the complete composition at the last eight note in bar 27 of the

third movement, when looking at the time code. And looking at bars it would land in bar 49 of

the second movement. That corresponds to where the recapitulation of the second movement

begins. Going back to the time code and that phi moment I would say that this is one of the

emotionally strongest parts of the entire composition, and it occurs close to the beginning of

the H part in the macroform for the complete composition. The H part starts in bar 27.

In the performance of the complete composition, we would land in the middle of bar 35 in the

third movement when looking at the timing. It’s in the H part of the macroform and very

strong emotionally. Looking at bars we would end up in bar 53 of the second movement. And

that is also in the recapitulation of the second movement. The reason why the bar changes is

that I have calculated with repeats in the performance but not done that in the score since the

repetition is open ended and could possibly also not happen at all.

For the first movement “Regn och åska” we would end up in bar 48 in the score and

performance when looking at bars. That correlates to the second phrase of the A4 part of the

mesoform. I wouldn’t call it climatic but it’s an important moment when the melodic portion

of the A part is reintroduced. The timecode, when looking at the score, is at the same bar of 48

on the second quarter note. That’s a fun coincident and the first time it happens in my analysis

of phi moments in these compositions. In the performance, the phi moment occurs in the

second half of bar 47. So still very close to where the notation says that the phi moment is.

Second movement “Nästan polska” has bar 36 as phi moment in the score and performance

when looking at bars. The timecode in the score correlates to bar 38, on the second quarter

note. And that is practically in the middle of the E1 part of the macroform. In the performance

we would end up in bar 39 on the last quarter note. That is a stronger climatic moment

compared to the other ones in the second movement and also, it’s in the same bar as when the

F4 part of the mesoform starts.

In the third and final movement, “Det oumbärliga slutet”, the phi moment for the bars differs.

In the score it’s bar 43 and in the performance it’s bar 47, due to the repetition of the end.

Looking at the form none of them correspond with a new part of the mesoform and is in fact

in different parts. These parts have a similar feeling to them, and both goes under H in the

macroform. Following the timecode for the score we land at bar 44 on the last beat in the 9/8-

time signature. That is close compared to the bar number in the score and they are in the same

part of the mesoform. For the performance the phi moment lands at bar 50 on the last beat of

the 9/8. Which is further away from what the bars says the phi should be. They are still in the

same part of the mesoform and in the H part of the macroform. For the final movement both

bars and timecode in Sibelius and performance and for the complete composition both

Sibelius and the performance when looking at the timecode would all have the phi moment in

the H part of the macroform but in different spots. This part and the very ending of the

composition that repeats material from here is to me the strongest emotional moment of the

whole composition. I don’t think it has anything to do with that it happens somewhat near the

Golden Ratio that makes me resonate the way I do. The strong emotions come from the

musical material being played but it’s nonetheless an interesting observation.

When using Golden Ratio for composing acoustic music we can see by my analysis of my

pieces that it will run into several problems. Do we relate the Golden Ratio to bar numbers or

according to the actual time in the music as performed? As seen above, these two measured

can differ substantially. Another problem is that the duration of the performance in seconds

will be different from what the notation program is calculating, and it will also vary from

performance to performance. To ensure that the length of the composition is as we composers

intend, we could have the performer perform the piece with a click-track. This would ensure

that the composition is the same length as intended, but this could result in a lack of

musicality in the performance unless the click-track is very well made to be musical and not

being perfectly static in tempo.

Another question is, does it really matter? Do we as humans feel the time in seconds that well

that if a performance of an acoustic composition written with the Golden Ratio calculated in

seconds, differs when played according to the composer’s calculations, will we feel an

imbalance in the form? Could it even be that we as composer can merely calculate the Golden

Ratio according to bar numbers, and have the same sense of balance in the form? I can’t

answer any of these questions, and I regard this as a research topic of its own, that would take

a lot of effort to answer.

6.1.3 Freeform and workflow

In this master’s project I used the program Freeform to create my analysis of form in the four

pieces, and I used it also to be able to show how the form in my own compositions is

constructed. As a compositional tool, I used it in some of my pieces and in some I did not. In

the pieces Det oumbärliga slutet and A Rondo of Nostalgic Memories, Freeform was not used

as a compositional tool since I started those compositions early in the project before I started

my analysis, and those pieces weren’t initially meant to be part of this thesis. For my pieces

Dreams of Zapping Televisions, Spa Music for the Modern Composer and Klopfgeist I did use

Freeform as a compositional tool from the start and all the way to the finished composition

expect Klopfgeist that I got frustrated and only made the macroform and parts of the

mesoform in Freeform. Thinking back on it, I believe the frustration comes from that I didn’t

do it to scale. That made it hard to work on the mesoform and sound objects, and the

composition in itself wasn’t demanding enough that I needed a detailed form notation to

finish it.

For my acoustic piece Dreams of Zapping Televisions working with form notation at the same

time as composing was of big help and made my workflow much easier. I could just open up

Freeform and look at what part I was supposed to work on, if it was composing the next part

or just go back and work more on orchestration. I could easily make notes on what needed to

be fixed and then go back and fix them at a later point. Instead of opening up the score,

listening to the music and trying to remember what to do and what ideas I had from the

previous session. This did really save me a lot of time when composing and made the starting

phase of each new session so much faster.

Another great thing with Freeform as a compositional tool is when planning form. It is so

much easier to do that when you are visually able to see it, and much of the groundwork

behind the composition is possible to do without notating everything in the score. You get a

bird’s eye view of the composition and can focus on the meso and macroform, and in the

score, you can focus on the sound objects/phrases and microstructure of the piece. The meso 

and macroform are generally not that easy to visually see in a score, especially not in a big

orchestral score, where sometimes just a couple of bars can take up a whole page.

For my electroacoustic piece Spa Music for the Modern Composer that uses the Golden Ratio

to create balance in the form, having a detailed and scaled notation of the Golden Ratio

skeleton was necessary. I did this in Freeform, it was painstakingly complicated, and took a

lot of time, but once it was done, working on the actual form for the piece was very simple.

Having the form notated in great detail and to scale did help the composition work in Logic. I

created markers in Logic, so I had the mesoform of the piece visual when I was working in

my DAW. Knowing all of this made the work easy and I had all of the benefits I experienced

in my acoustic piece here as well.

For future compositions both acoustic, electroacoustic and compositions in mixed media

works I will continue to use Freeform as a composition tool. For acoustic compositions I

don’t feel the need for the form notation to be in scale, but for the electroacoustic I feel that it

has to be. When it comes to mixed media works, I think it can work to be both in scale and

not in scale depending on the composition. In a composition like Det oumbärliga slutet,

where the tape part is mostly atmospheric and the performer doesn’t have to synch with

anything in the tape, I think working without being in scale is absolutely fine, but just to be

safe I would do the form notation in scale. I might try, as an experiment, to do an acoustic

composition in scale to see how I feel about it even though making the form notation to scale

according to a timecode takes much more time to do properly.

6.1.4 Notation in electroacoustic music

For me notation systems such as Typomorphology and Sound Notation in electroacoustic

music can be of importance. However, neither in my own practice as an electroacoustic

composer nor with the analysis I’ve made in this project, have I felt the need to use those

quite advanced ways of notation. My focus has been on the meso and macroform and then the

aural analysis of Spectromorphology has been enough for my analysis of the different

compositions. In my piece Klopfgeist I started to notate the macro and meso in the beginning

of working with the piece in Freeform, but felt mostly frustrated by it and ended up finishing

the piece only working in Logic without any other means of notation. For my piece Spa Music

for the Modern Composer, I worked with the Golden Ratio to create form (see chapter 5.2.2 to

see how I worked with the Golden Ratio in that piece). That demanded a very detailed

notation of the form. I used Freeform to make that detailed form notation and for that piece it

was absolutely necessary to have this. But my form notation does not show the details as

Typomorphology or Sound Notation does and for the electroacoustic music I do it is not a

necessity for me to go into that level of detail. If you work with a live electronic musician or

compose with the focus on microstructural levels I can see the point with detailed notation.

For me it is enough to work with form notation and not have a notation system for the sounds

themselves.

6.1.5 Thoughts of form, techniques and analysis

During this project I have actively started to use techniques to manipulate and clarify form in

my compositions. These techniques are hits, hits followed by silence or quasi silence and

crossfades. By quasi silence I mean that I mainly use either reverberation or weaker sounds

after the hit. These techniques are not new to me, but I have actively started to think about 

how I use them when I’m composing, compared to how I previously used them intuitively.

“To make music breath, intersperse silent rests. The silence does not have to be total; it can be

a low-level “bed” or halo of reverberation, which I often use as a cadence” (Roads, 2015, p.

378). By actively think about these techniques I feel that my craftmanship as a composer has

grown and my compositions have improved.

In my analytical work in this thesis, I started with only timecodes for when I felt that there

was a change in the mesoform. From there I made more careful, repeated listening, and put

down what I heard in words. By listening again, I sought to clarify if I would need to make

any changes before making it visual in Freeform. In Freeform I could more easily see what

parts of the mesoform related to one another. From there, I reduced the mesoform down to

macroform and even reduced it to an even higher level of macroform in as few parts as

possible. Seeing that a longer piece can be divided to a few parts has really changed how I

work with and plan form in my own compositions. In the creation of a longer piece, thinking

about form in all of these structural layers at the same time can be hard without some form of

notation of the form. Freeform works very well for me, although there probably are many

other programs out there working just as well or better, or perhaps even using pen and paper

would work as well for making notations of form.

An observation I’ve made about the form in my own compositions is that I tend to divide the

macroform in uneven numbers, mainly in three or five parts. With the parts of even numbers

being contrasting material to the uneven numbered parts. This trend of uneven number of

parts seems to follow in the mesoform of my compositions with a favor of five or seven parts.

But macroform with an even number of parts in the mesoform does also happen, just not as

regularly. If an uneven number of parts in the macro and mesoform is the best way to achieve

a good, interesting and well-balanced form in a composition, is not something I can say is the

ultimate way of doing it, but it seems to be what I as a composer find to be a good approach

and I gravitate towards it.

6.2 Further research

I imagine that further research about form in electroacoustic music could be to make analysis

of a large number of different electroacoustic composition to see even more ways of creating

form. This would also lead to the ability to see if there are certain formal schemes that are

more common than others, generalize and come up with theories about form constructions

similar as found in classical music, and taught in the universities today.

As further research, to continue my own development as a composer and broadening my

knowledge of form, other than more analysis of musical works, would be to look at other art

forms. Literature, movies and theater would be a great source for inspiration and knowledge

that are transformable to musical form. These fields of art are related to music in the sense

that all are about storytelling, instrumental music being the most abstract of them all. I believe

that as a composer I could gain a lot of knowledge by reading the theories and methods

addressing form in literature, movies and theater, and hereby I could develop yet new ways of

finding musical structures.