The main research question guiding my exploration -How can I lead and compose music for an ensemble that includes non-static elements?- is naturally followed by the secondary questions -What strategies can be used to balance these elements effectively?, -How can I foster the conditions necessary for meaningful interaction among musicians?, and even, -if the compositions and performance conditions are established, will the music genuinely change with each interaction, and to what extent? 

The methodology was clear from the beginning: to answer these questions, I needed to assemble an ensemble and engage in a comprehensive rehearsal process. This involved not only rehearsing the written music but also promoting a collaborative environment where musicians could familiarize themselves with various cues and notation methods. Developing a shared language was key to achieving interaction among its members, but adapting to new roles within the ensemble proved essential for developing a comprovisational project. All meetings were meticulously recorded, and the different versions of the scores were carefully archived. This systematic documentation allowed me to analyze the evolution of music over time, identifying key moments of interaction and innovation. I will be using selected excerpts from these sessions as illustrative examples to support my research findings, willing to provide a clearer understanding of how comprovisation can serve as an effective framework for musical collaboration. 

Throughout my career as a performer, primarily as a jazz trumpet player, I have come to appreciate the profound joy that arises from engaging music with interactive elements - works that allow for true dialogue with fellow musicians and self-expression with minimal restrictions. These more interactive scores feel far more fulfilling than simply adhering to a static written score.  

This reflection leads me to critically examine the dominant nature of Western music, which often emphasizes fidelity to the written score. Although the possibilities for interpretation and spontaneity—especially from the 20th century onwards—are present, primarily through minimalism and aleatoric music, they often remain too constrained, limiting their impact1. That being said, and setting aside these exceptions, I believe, from classical to popular genres, much of the Western music tradition is characterized by a precision of performance that often comes at the expense of personal expression. Even jazz, while celebrated for its improvisational aspects, typically operates within well-defined structures that can limit the scope of interaction. The open/free improvisation genre, which I also enjoy playing, deserves special mention. It embraces a fully collaborative ethos and fosters an environment where musicians co-create without rigid frameworks. However, the lack of preconceived material often leaves me searching for something to hold onto or refer to. 

 This search has led me to question the vast space between these two approaches - static scores and free improvisation. I want to navigate this territory, focusing on the intersection of fully notated music written with almost no room for interpretation, which I also enjoy composing, and fully open improvisation. I would like to cultivate a form of co-creation that emerges from my own compositions, serving as foundational material for musicians to refer to, while still allowing them to collaboratively reinterpret and reshape these elements so that the written music becomes dynamic rather than static.   

I believe this approach, besides giving freshness and dynamism to the music, enhances the richness of the musical experience and furthermore, challenges traditional roles within an ensemble. By inviting musicians to participate as co-composers, I aim to dissolve the hierarchy often found in ensemble dynamics, transform the role of the conductor, and foster a more egalitarian creative environment. To encapsulate this concept, I explore the term Comprovisation2, which reflects the act of improvising over established compositional material.  

Comprovisational works can be found in the context of jazz and new music from the middle of the twentieth century, works that could be seen as an urge to demonstrate that the concepts of composition and improvisation are extreme and unattainable poles of music-making, and that "all music-making is, in fact, a comprovisation: music with a score and with a context"3 . From Boulez and Stockhausen (Trope and Klavierstück XI, respectively), whose piano pieces introduced a comprovisational model based on structural shuffles—pre-composed blocks rearranged into an improvised sequence without note-to-note improvisation—to John Cage and Cornelius Cardew (Aria and The Great Learning, respectively), who adopted a more radical approach, using visually based scores that, while containing precise instructions, primarily served as frameworks for improvisation, encouraging skilled performers to creatively interpret and deviate from the written material, resulting in performances of unique spontaneity and variability.

Finding these approaches unsatisfying, I began exploring ways to enable large ensembles to improvise collectively while retaining the structural complexity and polyphonic dramaturgy of fully notated scores. In my pieces, the balance leans more heavily toward compositional elements, with improvisation serving to facilitate interaction, framed choices, and spontaneity among musicians and towards samples. The pre-written or pre-conceived material remains central, providing a framework within which the music can evolve organically.

This evolving process reshapes or reorders the composition during each performance, offering a fresh listening experience while preserving the recognizable identity of the work. The emphasis is on creating a dynamic musical landscape, where the 'now'—the interaction at the moment—transforms the piece without obscuring its essence. This ensures the music remains grounded in its compositional roots, while still allowing it to breathe and adapt in a live setting.