Notation of extended techniques

[reid]

Can anyone recommend a book or site that goes into detail about the notation and interpretation of extended orchestral techniques?

I've just been gifted a stack of Ligeti and Penderecki scores, and although it's possible to make an educated guess about how the notes you see and the notes you hear marry up, it'd be a blessing to have something a bit more concrete to go on.

Thanks!

[Angelo Clematide]

There are quite a few book on new notation, but the one I know of, are all in German. But isn't there in the preface an explanation, or in the score itself?

Ligeti prefered traditional notation. He wrote in the language of the orchestral players. His compositions may have a lot of other things far exceeding what is usual, traditionally known, or natural. But in most of his music he was very forethought about notation and he wrote more precise then necessary, his scores scores do not waste time on thinking what his notation means, but can be played right away by trained musicians.

Penderecki’s pieces, have a new sort of notation, often graphical, but very effective to the piece. I haven't seen many of them and played none. It is is said that one has to waste a lot of time what all that graphic means, but this is only hear say.

.

[reid]

Good point Angelo - I'm looking at Ligeti's 'Lontano' and it's entirely normal notation throughout.

I'm thinking more of the thick black lines, expanding arrows, etc of Penderecki's scores. Yes, there's usually a list of notation conventions at the start of each score, but perhaps that's what I'm wondering - are they conventions throughout the music world, or does each composer and piece subscribe to a different set of notations? If I get a bit carried away on a session, and present players with a bunch of stuff I've 'borrowed' from Utrenja, are they going to recognise it and play it, or shrug their shoulders and ask what the hell I want them to do?

[Angelo Clematide]

I think it is best to read what Ligeti himself said about his pieces. He was a precision worker. He left nothing to chance. Every composition he wrote has something hidden; something obscure; spirituel or philosophical; an aspect most people would not consider right away that something like that can be part or element of music; also a meaning or multiple meanings one can not see right away while looking at the score; sometimes it is build on psycho acoustics woven in, fooling you perception. If you don't find this elements, you can' play his music in the way he meant it. He sometimes called the orchestra a human machine. Lontano, as well many other pieces, you have to see them, it can not be fully understood listening on records. Lontano has multiple harmonic events running simultaeous, that's circa all I remember.

About Penderecki I don't know much, but he is pretty good, and I did enjoy listening to some of his music, but only on records, never meet him. I think he is still alive. I would think all of his notation is his standard, and nobody elses, there are maybe some exceptions, I don't know.

.

[MartinL]

A book I really like about notation is Kurt Stone's Music Notation in the Twentieth Century. Check it out, it might help you...