Electronic music pioneers

[Mr Arkadin]

Roland, I'm with you on this. I want to see the older guys on this thread as there are so many I don't know and frankly they need more exposure than someone like BT. I always found him a bit meh and his pioneering extended more to the overuse of posey haircuts and inappropriate highlights than anything musical.

Bring back the old guys and gals please.

[Roland Kuit]

Arne Nordheim
(20 June 1931 – 5 June 2010) was a Norwegian composer. Nordheim received numerous prizes for his compositions, and from 1982 lived in the Norwegian State's honorary residence, Grotten, next to the Royal Palace in Oslo. He was elected an honorary member of the International Society for Contemporary Music in 1997. On 18 August 2006, Arne Nordheim received the honorary doctors degree (doctor honoris causa) at the Norwegian Academy of Music. He died at the age of 78 and was given a State funeral.

At the then Oslo Conservatory of Music (now the Norwegian Academy of Music), where Nordheim studied from 1948 to 1952, he started out as a theory and organ student, but changed to composition, studying with Karl August Andersen (1903–1970), Bjarne Brustad, and Conrad Baden. Then in 1955 he studied with Vagn Holmboe in Copenhagen, and studied musique concrète in Paris. Later he studied electronic music in Bilthoven (1959), and paid many visits to the Studio Eksperymentalne of Polish Radio (1967–1972), where many of his early electronic works were realised (including Pace, Solitaire, and Lux et tenebrae (Poly-Poly)). In 2005, many lost and forgotten tapes of electronic compositions for radio drama for the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK) were rediscovered, reminding us that Nordheim also developed his electronic musical language in his home country.

His Essay for string quartet was first performed in Stockholm in 1954, but Nordheim always considered his String Quartet of 1956 as his Opus 1. His musical output is focused around themes of 'solitude, death, love, and landscape'; these themes are already evident in his song cycle Aftonland (Evening Land, 1959), a setting of poems by the Swedish poet Pär Lagerkvist, which brought him national recognition. The 1961 Canzona per orchestra was his international breakthrough. Inspired by Giovanni Gabrieli's canzone, the work showcases Nordheim's historical leanings, as well as his occupation with space as a parameter of music. Nordheim's spatial concerns, coupled with his focus on death and human suffering, are brought together in what is arguably his most famous work, Epitaffio per orchestra e nastro magnetico (1963). Written in memory of the Norwegian flautist Alf Andersen, who died that year at a very young age, the work incorporated Salvatore Quasimodo's poem Ed è sùbito sera. Originally conceived for orchestra and chorus, Nordheim realised that his wish to have the whole performance space 'singing' was better achieved with the use of electronic means. The result is a remarkable, almost imperceptible, blending of the orchestral sounds with the choral sounds of the tape, where the final line 'ed è sùbito sera' ('and suddenly it is evening') is the only part of the text that can be heard.

His later compositions include The Tempest (1979), Klokkesong (1984), Magma (1988), the Violin Concerto (1996) and Fonos for trombone and orchestra (2004). Arne Norheim was inspired by the neumes and the sound of the medieval bells in Kaupanger stave church in composing the work Klokkesong, which was first performed in the church. In The Tempest, a ballet based on Shakespeare's play, electronics and orchestral sounds are again mixed, while the focus is more strongly on vocal music (e.g. the 'double voice' of Caliban), while Nordheim's continued use of historical elements is shown by the incorporation of Leonardo da Vinci's musical rebus, which solved reads Amore sol la mi fa remirare, la sol mi fa sollecita. Draumkvedet is a monumental stage work for orchestra, (acting) chamber choir, soloists and dancers, and was performed 40 times in 1994 with the Broadcasting Corporation Radio Orchestra and Grex Vocalis.(Wiki).



Arne Nordheim - Solitaire,1968:
http://youtu.be/3db0bMg9GI0

[dante]

I'm sorry, I don't consider BT a pioneer in the electronic field.
En-light me please, where lies his pioneer-ism?
In composition? Sound Design?
What is cutting edge about him, despite is professionalism?

The pioneerism is well spelled out (CSound for example), I dont think I need do that, any more than you do with yours.

This thread is called 'Electronic music pioneers' - nothing in the title contains any more specific criteria.

For example, is the limitation on the period they were in ? What is the latest year you would consider approriate ?

If not the period, then what ? The age of the person ? The style of the music ? Does it have to be music concrete for example ?

How about George Martin and what he did with 'Life in a Day' ? Would that qualify ? Or is it too 'popular' ?

[hubird]

at least BT's contribution partly comes quite close to the contributions of these pioneers, including Roland one's themselfs.

I was actually happy to see BT's seemless integration of 'normal' musical elements and the 'typical' ckicks/rattles modulated oscillator waving sounds which Roland loves to produce.
You bet BT knows his concrete classics, you can hear it, and if not even better!

If you wanne propagate this fundamental and redefining approach of what 'music' can be, one should be happy with this BT's experimental ambient.
If you wanne get music concrete and it's upfollowing styles out of the university aulas and musea expo rooms this is the way to go, I'd say.
It brings it to a new audience.

Don't understand the frustration...I'd welcom his extraordinary contribution with proud.

[dante]

at least BT's contribution partly comes quite close to the contributions of these pioneers, including Roland one's themselfs.

I was actually happy to see BT's seemless integration of 'normal' musical elements and the 'typical' ckicks/rattles modulated oscillator waving sounds which Roland loves to produce.

In fact, Godley and Creme were the first (popular) examples I heard of those type of 'clicks' - made with the Kepex Noise Gate - on thier doomed 1977 'Consequences' concept album - not to mention thier Gizmo (electronic guitar bow) excursions.

Are they not 'Electronic Music Pioneers' ? No one had made an album based on a guitar bow and a noise gate before, overblown or not, far less designed and produced the actual gadgets themselves.

They knew the album was going to flop and that they would be percieved as self-indulgant pop stars but that didnt stop them and they produced it anyway, and it holds a place in music history.

Well, they predate Gary Numan, who is also considered somewhat of a pioneer.

To be publically favoured - I believe - is not a criteria for pioneership but niether is it an exclusion.

Otherwise, maybe we should just exclude BT and the Beatles due to thier hair styles ?

[Roland Kuit]

Thank you for your explanation Dante.

The use of C Sound alone makes nobody a pioneer and I just heard a lame Eno-kind of abstract.
So I wondered.

[Mr Arkadin]

Otherwise, maybe we should just exclude BT and the Beatles due to thier hair styles ?

Definitely BT. What was he thinking with those haircuts? Sorry, for some reason his look used to wind me up no end. But I stand by the fact that I don't consider him any pioneer. I am a huge Gary Numan fan, and Eno and love Goddley and Creme's experimentations as well as The Beatles'. Yes some of those you could include, but really these other guys and gals have had NO exposure and it is really interesting to be educated in them - I only know what would be considered the popular end of all this, so the Radiophonic crew (Derbyshire, Oram, Baker, Carey etc.) and composers like Xenakis, Ashley and Ligeti. Before BT I would have Aphex Twin or Squarepusher or even Kraftwerk or Moroder. Even then I'm not sure they would fit in this thread.

(Side note: thanks for the Robert Ashley (RIP) entry as I have been a huge fan for a number of years - no-one else seems to have heard of him)

[Roland Kuit]

I was actually happy to see BT's seemless integration of 'normal' musical elements and the 'typical' ckicks/rattles modulated oscillator waving sounds which Roland loves to produce.

So it is a professional cook taking ingredients from here and there, but what's making him a pioneer?

I agree in what Mr. Arkadin says: "Before BT I would have Aphex Twin or Squarepusher or even Kraftwerk or Moroder. Even then I'm not sure they would fit in this thread."

[hubird]

I respect everyone's opinion

- At least BT cooks a meal out of it.

[Roland Kuit]

But cooking a meal with 'normal' ingredients has no added value for this topic.
I have no problem that you find his music tasty, but so are a million others cooking nice dishes.

[Roland Kuit]

- At least BT cooks a meal out of it.

What do you mean with this?
For some meals you have to be a connoisseur to appreciate the dish.

[dante]

All seems rather subjective to me.

For example, how is Arne Nordhiem cooking with new ingredients ? By mixing electronic sounds with orchestral in the 70s ?

Indeed, there seems to be an implication that Avant-garde academics have used up all the ingredients and that the pantry is now dry ! Whether they predate popular genres or not ..

I agree BT doesn't fit the profile of the other composers entered here, but I find no convincing arguments here that exclude him from the title of the thread.

I also find many of the arguments used against his inclusion could just as easily apply to many of the others.

For example, the notion that he shouldn't be included until certain others had been included before him. All seems a bit secret society-ish to me. As does the implication of non-innovation in more popular genres seem just as narrow as the prejudices expressed in another thread here regards the musicality of avantegarde.

If the definition of musicality be wide, then so be the definition of innovation.

[Roland Kuit]

Oh no Dante, please don't!
Otherwise I pumped all those composers for nothing.
Finally some discussion.
I started this thread to give a notion about new ways.
New ways in creating sound and creating music (composition).
New technologies can bring more possibilities.
I write 'can' here because it is to the user of these technologies what to do with it.
I am talking about people who bring music a step further.
We can talk about about how electronic music evolves and influences other people.
Or was Robert Moog, by placing a keyboard to his synths, creating a trap?
Is Wendy Carlos a pioneer because he 'played' Bach on a synthesizer?
Considerations/contemplations like these.

[Roland Kuit]

Toshi Ichiyanagi
born 4 February 1933, Kobe, Japan) is a Japanese composer of avant-garde music. He studied with Tomojiro Ikenouchi, Kishio Hirao and John Cage.

One of his most notable works is the 1960 composition, Kaiki, which combined Japanese instruments, shō and koto, and western instruments, harmonica and saxophone. Another work Distance (1961) requires the performers to play from a distance of three meters from their instruments. Anima 7 (1964) states that chosen action should be performed "as slowly as possible."
Ichiyanagi was married to Yoko Ono from 1956 to 1963.
Ichiyanagi is the recipient of the 33rd Suntory Music Award (2001). He has been honoured with Japan's Order of Culture.



Toshi Ichiyanagi - Parallel Music, 1962:
http://youtu.be/FAlqsVaZLi0

[borg]

Imho, two of the main differences between 'academic' and 'pop' are beautiful scores (sheet music) and the absence of repetitivity in the 'academic' genre (besides budget ). I worked a few years for the Champ d'Action ensemble (Roland might even know it's artistic leader Serge Verstockt in Person as he also studied in The Hague, I'll add my informative contribution later...). Now I work in a theatre were this kind of music is featured regelarly. Nowadays it's mainly a Max/MSP scene (for quite some time actualy, and max would probably not have gotten this far without the academic interest!), and stylistically there, of course, is quite a gap, but I also see lots of cross over projects, with other art forms, but also with different music genres (even death metal)...

Euh, what was I trying to say? Okay, BT seems a bit of a stretch to me when it comes to pioneerism, I'd rather add Autechre, and maybe Amon Tobin or Richard Devine... Or are we just confusing a piece of music with sound design? Anyway, Roland started this nice informative thread, gave it a undeniably distinctive direction with the people he added, and BT doesn't fit that bill.

But... Music is the best! And also, the mind is like a parachute, it doesn't work when not open... So, without deviation from the norm, there is no progress!
I want to add Frank Zappa to the list. He beat the Beatles and Brian Wilson in the race to bring us the first pop album where the studio was used as a new way of designing music, had always the most cutting edge technology available for his musicians and himself, and he definately may be given the title of 'academic'...

[dante]

Oh no Dante, please don't! Otherwise I pumped all those composers for nothing.

Dont what ? Primarily, all I am doing is challenging the title of the thread, not devaluing your composers contributions. Even if I drew comparisons of re-use vs new across our collective genres, it does not diminish anyones contributions, just challenges definitions, or the notion of lack of innovation in re-use.

For example, 'Innovation'. I suppose it depends on whether innovation is purely the invention of something, or whether it needs to have an element of popularisation.

What's the point of inventing a new sound or new sound making technique or gadget if no one hears it ? What does it matter whether the cook used new or old ingredients if nothing gets bought to the table ? And does it matter so much if the ingredients are not new if the flavour combination is ?

Wendy Carlos did not invent the synthesiser, nor did he invent the compositions. But he certainly bought both to the attention of a much wider audience.

Similarly, dr Richard Boulanger invented the CSound language, but I had never heard of it until binary universe. Admittedly Switched on Bach had more impact, to me, but that's just a matter of degree.

I would say Bach, Carlos, Moog, Boulanger and BT all helped bring something to wider audiences and qualify for that particular aspect of pioneering, no matter the sequence of their link in the chain or their relative importance. What did Zappa bring ? I would say that he bought a realisation of satire as a powerful musical tool. Zappa didnt invent satire but he sure as hell popularised it.

He cooked that particular ingredient a dozen different ways and it tasted good, and different, every single time. Even when it smelled funny.

[Bud Weiser]

Oh no Dante, please don't!
Otherwise I pumped all those composers for nothing.
Finally some discussion.
I started this thread to give a notion about new ways.
New ways in creating sound and creating music (composition).

Please define "new ways" in regards of composing MUSIC.

New technologies can bring more possibilities.

I don´t think technologies bring more possibillities in regards of composing something or "composition" as we understand it in regards of "music".

I write 'can' here because it is to the user of these technologies what to do with it.
I am talking about people who bring music a step further.

To me, it´s questionable if what you do brings "music" a step further.

We can talk about about how electronic music evolves and influences other people.

That´s a completeley different approach because NOW you talk about "electronic music".

Or was Robert Moog, by placing a keyboard to his synths, creating a trap?
Is Wendy Carlos a pioneer because he 'played' Bach on a synthesizer?
Considerations/contemplations like these.

Bob didn´t create a trap.
We have a diatonic system and that´s it what´s being used to compose/create music.
That system has a tradition and I won´t ignore it.
It doesn´t need electronics at all, just only a piece of paper, a pen and imagination,- and at least a skilled perfomer presenting that composition on one of the instruments following/using the diatonic system.
Bob, as a designer of an electronic instrument, had the problem to create the right controller for that instrument and he recognized very well,- a keyboard is the right one (having sales in mind).
Nothing bad to me ...

Wendy Carlos never was a pioneer to me.
Playing Bach on an electronic instrument changed nothing than the sound,- period.

Roland,- I like what you do, you have a LOT of background.
But,- most of your creations are SOUND to me,- not compositions.

But,- the latest stuff I listened to @Soundcloud changed that a bit !
I enjoyed !

Nonetheless,- there is "listening habit" and/or "listening experience" ...
We probably have to accept most people don´t want too much changes and will never (or very slow) recognize any intellectual progress.
They simply don´t need that for their entertainment.

So,- YOU create great SOUNDS using your skills and experinece and others create great compositions using the traditional skills and experience,- p.ex. for the piano,- and I now wonder where´s the difference except "the technology" consumates power and the piano doesn´t.
And please,- now don´t understand me wrong because I´m NOT a concert pianist.
Instead I use electronic keyboards since decades and made my living w/ these, but I´m somewhat envy about what traditional musicans can do with their instruments just by reading music being created hundreds of years ago,- and then come all these guys buying electronic gear and think they can do the same because there´s now the ability to PROGRAM music.

For me, digital gear is tools,- nothing more.
It doesn´t make you a better musician or composer.

There´s only the result and the acceptance.

I appreciate you have the acceptance as a programmer of modular systems !

Bud

[dante]

Well, I'm slightly different on that to you Bud, I accept avantegarde and concrete as musical genres despite popularity, but I don't accept that they are the only theatre for innovation and pioneering.

Perhaps pioneering in a chronological sense, but chronology is not a complete measure of the essence of pioneering.

[Roland Kuit]

First a reply to Dante(bear in mind it is early here and before the coffee):

I was talking about your posting of BT.
Don't remove it.
Challaging this topic's name is fine.
Defenition of the word pioneer:
One who goes before, preparing the way for others to follow.

[What's the point of inventing a new sound or new sound making technique or gadget if no one hears it ? What does it matter whether the cook used new or old ingredients if nothing gets bought to the table ? And does it matter so much if the ingredients are not new if the flavour combination is ?]

Without research we would not have the beautiful instruments we use and new music.
It is because the needs of those pioneers(working in their labs, or the lab of an institution) that lots of modules, instruments and software has been designed for use to create music. A lot has changed. F.i. on Sonology, The Hague, there is now a student department for designing electronic instruments added. Students working together with other students(composition).

[Wendy Carlos did not invent the synthesiser, nor did he invent the compositions. But he certainly bought both to the attention of a much wider audience.

Similarly, dr Richard Boulanger invented the CSound language, but I had never heard of it until binary universe. Admittedly Switched on Bach had more impact, to me, but that's just a matter of degree.]

Don't mix up handy businessman with pioneers.
As always, some clever people making money by selling 'sentiments'.
And often this is unconscious because this is what they know.
As pop music is sentimental music.
And that is ok, it serves the needs of people.
Selling just nice recognisable packets.

Pioneers disrupt society.(I hope).
Shock: after the anger or astonishment, these new ways will find a place in the more common grounds.

[Roland Kuit]

To Bud, after one coffee!


[That´s a completeley different approach because NOW you talk about "electronic music".]
Approach to what?

[We have a diatonic system and that´s it what´s being used to compose/create music.
That system has a tradition and I won´t ignore it.
It doesn´t need electronics at all, just only a piece of paper, a pen and imagination,- and at least a skilled perfomer presenting that composition on one of the instruments following/using the diatonic system.
Bob, as a designer of an electronic instrument, had the problem to create the right controller for that instrument and he recognized very well,- a keyboard is the right one (having sales in mind).
Nothing bad to me ...]
Not for you, that's fine.
I played Bach too, and others(still do).

[Roland,- I like what you do, you have a LOT of background.
But,- most of your creations are SOUND to me,- not compositions.]
That is a matter of opinion.

[But,- the latest stuff I listened to @Soundcloud changed that a bit !
I enjoyed !]
Thanks, it's sounding nearly as music we all know. But these were a kind of 'finger exercises' before the disruptness comes in.

[where´s the difference except "the technology" consumates power and the piano doesn´t.]
Wrong. A concert pianist uses as much calories as a road worker.

[For me, digital gear is tools,- nothing more.
It doesn´t make you a better musician or composer.]
I totally agree.

[There´s only the result and the acceptance.]
For and by whom?
My music is considered as music by my teachers.
Pioneers in their fields.
And nowadays as such by professors world wide.

If you like I can write more about composition.
There is much more than a diatonic system!

BTW, you can find my MUSIC at:
DONEMUS Publishing House of Dutch Contemporary Music:
https://webshop.donemus.com/action/front/home