Iannis

 Xenakis:  A  Stochas1c  Approach  of  

Orchestra1on  -­‐  The  Example  of  Achorripsis

Iannis  Xenakis  -­‐  Interna-onal  “In  Memoriam”  Conference,  Nicosia,  Cyprus  2011

Manos  Panayiotakis

PhD  in  Music  -­‐  Composi-on

The  University  of  York

Athens  2011
Iannis   Xenakis:   A   Stochas1c   Approach   of   Orchestra1on   -­‐   The   Example   of  
Achorripsis

Manos  Panayiotakis  
(PhD  in  Composi2on,  the  University  of  York)

Abstract

Orchestra-on  has  always  been  a  personal  element  of  composi-onal  process.  Since  the  dawn  
of   the  art   of   composi-on,   the  various  combina-ons  of   instruments   have   been   used   as  a  
-mbral  paleMe  to  form  the  overall  colour  of  the  musical  works.  During  the  twen-eth  century,  
the  parameter   of  orchestra-on   became  more   personalised  and   each  composer   developed  
different  ways  to  organise  the  orchestral  sound  or   form  a  func-onal  ensemble,  according  to  
the  personal  composi-onal  language.  Xenakis’  case  was  no  different.  Rejec-ng  the  theory  of  
serialism,  Xenakis  developed  his  own   methodology  to  provide  a  personal,   stochas-c   way   to  
combine   instruments  in  order   to  organise  his  orchestra-on/instrumenta-on  which  consists  
of  mul-ple  -mbral  layers.

Emerging  from  the  methodology  followed  in  ‘Achorripsis’,  this  paper  examines:

• Organisa-on  of  music  material  into  music  events  forming  the  orchestra-on  plan
• Clouds   of   sounds   and   harmonic   densi-es   as   substan-al   parameters   of   Xenakis’  
orchestra-on
• Orchestra-on  climax  through  the  various  stochas-c  methods  used
• Aesthe-c  evalua-on  of  Xenakis’  orchestra-on  methodology
• Future  developments  of  21st  century’s  orchestra-on  techniques

The  essen-al  -mbral  organisa-on  leads  to  the  inven-on  of  a  stochas-c  orchestra-on,  which  
is   based   on   the   main   principles   comprising   the   composi-onal   plan   of   each   work.  
Undoubtedly,   Xenakis’   methodology   opened   wide   horizons  for   developing   the  formalised  
thought,  placed  on  an  ar-s-c  background,   and   also  created   a  unique  balance   between  the  
logic  and  the  ar-s-c  element.

2
1. Introduc1on  -­‐  Talking  about  Orchestra1on

The  organisa-on   of  instrumenta-on  and  orchestra-on  has  always  been  a  powerful  tool  for  
every   composer  to  form  his  -mbral  paleMe  and  ‘give  life’  to  the  primary  composi-onal  ideas  
in  a  unique,  personal  way.  In  his  book  ‘History  of  Orchestra2on’,  Adam  Carse  claims:

‘Orchestra2on  has  been  many  things  to  many  composers.  It   has  been  
a  servant  of  the  great,  a  support  to  the  mediocre,  and   a  cloak  for  the  
feeble.   Its   past   lives   enshrined   in   the   works   of   the   great   dead,   its  
present  pants  aHer  the  exer2on   of   recent   progress,  and   its  future  lies  
as  completely  hidden  as  it  lay  at  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century1.’

The   case   of   Iannis   Xenakis   was   not   an   excep-on.   At   the   ar-cle   ‘Xenakis   on   Xenakis’,  
published  by   Perspec-ves   of   New  Music  in  1987,   he  argues  that   the  instrumental  realm  is    
usually  richer   than  the  electronic,  because  the  orchestra  consists  of  miscellaneous,  individual  
units,  which  can  be  transmit  an  infinity   of  sounds.  The  composer   has  to  iden-fy  the  -mbral  
framework  and  then  combine,  manipulate  and  finally   transcribe  onto  paper    those  individual  
units,  in  order  to  set  up  what  he  calls  ‘human  orchestra  machine’ 2.

Having  rejected  the   ideas  of  ‘integral  serialism’3 ,  the  introduc-on  of  stochas-c   methods  to  
composi-onal  process   could   not  be   developed  without  the  parameter   of  instrumenta-on/
orchestra-on  being  included.  Xenakis  used  to  contend  that  a  composer  must  be  free  in  order  
to   invent   new   things.   Consequently   he   had   to   find   new   ways  to   organise   the   absolute  
freedom  (ataxia).  The  idea  that  ‘absolute  freedom  requires  absolute  responsibility’4   led  to  the  
development   of   his   stochas-c   methodology   and   to   the   crea-on   of   a   personal   -mbral  
language,  which  would  produce  previously  unheard  sounds 5.  

1  Adam  Carse,  History  of  Orchestra1on,  Dover,  New  York  1964,  p.  337

2  Iannis  Xenakis,  Roberta  Brown,  John  Rahn,  Xenakis  on  Xenakis,  Perspec-ves  on  New  Music,  Vol.  25  No.  1/2,  

Winter/Summer  1987,  p.  16-­‐63,  p.  21

3  Richard  Taruskin,  Music  in  the  late  twen1eth  century,  Oxford  University  Press,  USA  2005,  p.  78

4  Gerard  Pape,  Iannis  Xenakis  and  the  ‘Real’  of  Musical  Composi1on,  Computer  Music  Journal,  Vol.  26  No.  1,  

Spring  2002  ,  p.  16-­‐21,  p.    16

5  Makis  Solomos,  The  Unity  of  Xenakis’  Instrumental  and  Eectroacous1c  Music:  The  Case  for  ‘Brownian  

Movements’,  Perspec-ves  of  New  Music,  Vol.  39  No.  1,  Winter  2001,  p.  244-­‐254
Xenakis’   stochas-c   orchestra-on   could   be   compared   to   the   stochas-c   techniques   which  
Michael  Philippot6   and  Fred  Whipple  applied  to  their  pain-ng,  following  several  sets  of  rules  
which  govern  various  natural  phenomena.  Fred  Whipple  claims  that:  

‘Random  numbers  by  means  of  rules   can,   in  fact,   produce   forms  and  
colour   contribu2ons.   [...]   Stochas2c   pain2ng   involves   crea2vity   and  
self-­‐expression,  although  not   of  the  classical  style.  [...]  As  colour  shock  
has   become   one   of   the   objec2ves   of   certain   abstract   pain2ngs,  
perhaps   I   should   choose   complementary   colour   systems   and   make  
some  stochas2c  pain2ngs  emphasising  this  eye-­‐strain  inducer’7.

The  organisa-on  both  of  the  colours  and  the  acous-c   -mbres  paleMe  is  based  on  the  same  
aesthe-c   idea,   arising   by   the  same  ar-s-c   concern   of   how  a  set  of  numerical   rules  can  be  
applied  to  art   in   order   to  produce  innova-ve,   and   the  same   -me   interes-ng  works.   This  
paper   will   aMempt   a   deeper   explora-on   on   aesthe-cal   aspects   of   Xenakis’   approach   to  
Orchestra-on,  Instrumenta-on  and  manipula-on  of  -mbre  in  general.

2. Organisa1on   of   clouds,   musical   quanta   and   1mbral   parameters   through   stochas1c  

methodology

It  is  historically  well  known  that  one  of  the  twen-eth  century’s  main  composi-onal  concerns  
has  been  the  elabora-on  of  sound  itself,   an  idea  which  became  a  substan-al  element   for  the  
development  of  electronic  music.   Inspired  from   the   exponen-al  development   of   electronic  
music,   composers  such   as  Lutosławski,   Penderecki,  Lige-  and  Xenakis  introduced  the  use  of  
sound   masses,   as   an   organisa-on   of   harmonic   sonori-es   rather   that   any   kind   of   tonal  
rela-onship 8.  In  1954,  with   Metastaseis,   Xenakis  denounced  the  linear  polyphonic  thought.  
Contrary  to  the  contemporary  idea  of  serial  music  during  the  1950’s,  he  proposed  the  world  
of   sound   masses  (or   clouds  or   sound  galaxies)   and   vast   groups  of   sound   events 9.   At   this  

6  Iannis  Xenakis,  Formalized  Music,  Pendragon  Press,  New  York  1992,  p.  39

7  Fred  L.  Whipple,  Stochas1c  Pain1ng,  Leonardo,  Vol.  1  No.  1,  January  1968,  p.  81-­‐83

8  Andy  Hamilton,  Aesthe1cs  &  Music,  Con-nuum,  New  York  2007,  p.  60-­‐61

9  Iannis  Xenakis.  Towards  a  Metamusic,  Tempo,  New  series,  No.  93,  Summer  1970,  p.  2-­‐29,  p.  3

4
point,  instrumenta-on  and  orchestra-on  played  decisive  role  to  the  -mbral  manipula-on  of  
the  sound  clouds.  s

Xenakis’   understanding   about   the   elabora-on   of   the   -mbre   and   the   organisa-on   of  
instrumental  colour  can  be  more  dis-nct  with  a  closer  look  to  his  work  ‘Nomos  Alpha’  (1966)  
for  solo  Violoncello.  To  set   the  -mbral  plan  of  this  work,  the  composer   groups  the  sound  into  
three  categories  (bowing,  plucking  and  Col  Legno  respec-vely),   and  extends  those  -mbres  in  
a   remarkable   degree 10,   allowing   several   harmonics   and   other   spectral   material   appear.  
Although  this  is  a  solo  work,  the  ideas  used  for   the  -mbral  forma-on  (or  the  instrumenta-on  
for   works  for   larger   ensembles)   are  substan-al   and   represent   the  overall  methodology   of  
Xenakis  to  produce  both  new  and  interes-ng  sounds.   This  categorisa-on  of   -mbres,   which  
consists  the  primary   material  for   his  composi-onal  elabora-on  through   several  stochas-c  
methods,  is  fundamental  for  most  of  Xenakis‘  works.    

Through  his  stochas-c  methodology,  Xenakis  used  the  plas-city   of  the  numerical  element  to  
develop  an   innova-ve  approach  for   every   musical  parameter,   including   the   orchestra-on.  
The  crea-on  of  what   he  called  ‘musical  quanta 11’  led  to  the  development   of   several  sound  
objects,   usually   characterised  by   instrumental  autonomy.   The  technique  of   organising   the  
various  musical  quanta  is  -ghtly   woven   with  Xenakis’   research  on   the   granula-on  of  sound  
and   the   granular   synthesis.   Many   of   Xenakis’   instrumental   works     focus   on   a   further  
explora-on   of   the   granula-on  of   sound.   The  genera-on   of   musical  quanta  as   autonomic  
-mbral  units  undoubtedly  is  an  ar-s-c   way  to  extend  and  personalise  the  orchestral  -mbre.  
BrigiMe  Robindoré  in  1996,  claims  about  the  rela-onship  between  the  granular  process  and  
the  instrumental  prac-se  that:

‘A   granular   concep2on   of   sound   pervades   Iannis   Xenakis,   theories,  

and  this  is   naturally   linked  to  his  affinity   for  sta2s2cal  processes,  with  
the   ways   in   which   numbers   describe   processes   of   scaWering   and  
coalescence   in   space   and   2me.   For   example,   when   speaking   of   his  
orchestral  work   Terretêktorh  (1965-­‐66)  he  describes  it  as  a  Sonotron:  

10  Evan  Jones,  An  Acous1c  Analysis  of  Col  Legno  Ar1cula1on  in  Iannis  Xenakis’s  Nomos  Alpha,  Computer  

Music  Journal,  Vol.  26  No.  1,  Spring  2002,  p.  73-­‐86    p.  73
11  BrigiMe  Robindoré,  Eskhaté  Ereuna:  Extending  the  limits  of  musical  thought  -­‐  Comments  on  and  by  Iannis  

Xenakis,  Computer  Music  Journal,  Vol.  20  No.  4,  1996,  p.  11-­‐16,  p.  12
5
 an   accelerator   of   sonorous   par2cles,   a   disintegrator   of   sonorous  
masses 12’.

This  Mathema-cal-­‐Stochas-c   calcula-on   using   several   formulas  such   as   the   probabili-es  

theory,   the   Poison   gas   theory,   the   Markovian   chains   or   other   laws   of   nature   and  
mathema-cal  theories,   were   used   to   shape  various  sta-s-cal,   independent   sound   events  
which   are  combined  in  a  musical,   sophis-cated   way,  to   form  the  instrumental  colours 13.   A  
common   technique  used  by   Xenakis  was  the   mul-plicity   of  the  independent   local  -mbres,  
construc-ng  the  -mbral  galaxies 14.

As   discussed  at   the  introduc-on,   Xenakis  believed   in  a  controlled   composi-onal  freedom.  

Regarding  the  instrumenta-on  and  orchestra-on  of  his  chamber   music  and  orchestral  works,  
the  calcula-on  of  the  chance  becomes  a  func-onal,   -mbral  framework  for   the  development  
and  the  manipula-on  of  the  sound  clouds.  The  -mbre  of   the  several  clouds  is  usually   based  
on   various  independent  instrumental  lines  which   are  characterised  by  independent  rhythm,  
density,   dynamics,   ar-cula-on   and   pitches 15.   The   amalgama-on   of   either   small  or   larger  
amounts  of   such   instrumental   lines,   ooen   produce  a  textural  homogeneity,   based  on   the  
stochas-c   randomisa-on   of   the   numerical   data.   Different   calcula-ons   produce   different  
orchestral  colours  depending  on  the  arrangement  of   the  musical  units.  At  this  point,  Xenakis  
underlines   the   importance   of   the   colour   and   tone   configura-on,   according   to   the  
contrac-ons  of   -me.   In   par-cular   he   claims  that  ‘The  same  sounds,   heard   in   different  2me  
frames,  produce  unexpected  2mbral  effects16’.

It   is  almost  sure  that  new  ways  of  organising  the  sound  create  new  -mbres.  Aoer  examining  
the  granula-on-­‐quan-sa-on  of  sound  using  small,  independent  units,   one  can  say  that,  for  
Xenakis,   the  organisa-on  of   -mbre   consists   of   variable  amounts  of   sound   events,   whose  

12  Ibid  footnote  11

13  Rober  Morgan,  Twen1eth  Century  Music,  Norton,  USA  1991,  p.  393

14  Iannis  Xenakis,  Formalized  Music,  Pendragon  Press,  New  York  1992,  p.  12-­‐13

15  Roland  Squibbs,  Xenakis  in  Miniature:  Style  and  Structure  in  ‘á  r.  (Hommage  á  Ravel)’  for  Piano  (1987),  

Perspec-ves  of  New  Music,  Vol.  41  No.  1,  Winter  2003,  p.  120-­‐153,  p.  121
16  Ibid  footnote  2

6
number   creates   a   larger,   overall   sound   event17 .   All   those   short-­‐dura-on   sonic   units   are  
dominated  by   a  number   of  preset  stochas-c  rules.  This  number   of  rules  disposes  the   sonic  
informa-on   on   the   work’s   -meline,   which   is   also   manipulated   by   either   the   same   or   a  
different  group  of  rules.  Consequently,  the  crea-on  of  a  specific  instrumental  colour  (such  as  
a  cloud  of  pizzica-)  is  a  result  of  a  chain  of  logical  no-ons 18  which   generates  this  personal,  
unique  stochas-c  -mbre,  both  instrumental  and  electronic.

3. The  example  of  “Achorripsis”  -­‐  Beyond  the  Poison’s  Formula

Achorripsis  (Ηχος  +   ρίψεις  =  jets  of  sound)  is  undoubtedly  one  of   the  most   discussed  works  
by   Iannis   Xenakis,   not   only   because   of   the   innova-ve   theore-cal   base,   but   also   for   the  
aesthe-cal   base,   regarding   the  instrumental,   -mbral   and   structural   musicality.   Being   the  
second  work  on  which  Xenakis  experimented  with  stochas-c  methods,  a  substan-al  reason,  
which   makes   the   instrumenta-on   of   Achorripsis   interes-ng   and   innova-ve,   is   the  
organisa-on   of   instrumental   colours   into   independent   sound   events,   dominated   by   the  
probabili-es.   In   par-cular,   the  organisa-on  of   -mbre  into  sound   units  led  Xenakis   to   the  
crea-on   of   the  well-­‐known   ‘matrix   of  Achorripsis’,   which  was  used  for  the  arrangement   of  
-mbre   and   textural   density   on   the   work’s   -meline.   The   matrix   consists   of   seven   rows  
corresponding  to   seven  different   -mbres:   Flute,  Oboe,  Strings  Glissando,  Percussion,   Strings  
Pizzicato,  Brass  and  Strings  arco   respec-vely.   Clarinet  and  bass  clarinet   are   included  in  the  
flute  group  and  bassoon  and   contrabassoon  in   the  oboe  group.   The  matrix   is  at  the  same  
-me   divided   into   28   columns,   which   represent   28   units   of   -me,   each   one   las-ng   for  
approximately   15  seconds  (6.5  bars).  Apart  from  the  arrangement  of  instrumental  colour  on  
the  -meline,  the  matrix  also  works  as  a  density  map,   defining  the  various  textures  using  the  
mul-plicity   of   sound   events   and   their   organisa-on   into   zero,   single,   double,   triple   and  
quadruple  events  respec-vely.  It   is  obvious  that  each  mul-plicity   of  the  events  also  defines  
the  instrumenta-on  of  each  passage:

17  Makis  Solomos  (ed)  and  Tina  Plyta  (tr),  Ιάννης  Ξενάκης  -­‐  Κείμενα  περί  Μουσικής  και  Αρχιτεκτονικής  (Iannis  

Xenakis  -­‐  Texts  on  Music  and  Architecture),  Psichogios,  Athens  2001  p.  73
18  ibid

7
 Iannis  Xenakis  -­‐  Matrix  of  Achorripsis  (Formalized  Music,  Pendragon  Press,  New  York  1992),  p.  28

Although  Achorripsis  is  not  an  orchestral  work,  the  musical  material  is  organised  according  to  
the  theory   of   sound-­‐clouds 19.   Following   a   technique  which  is  similar   to  the   granula-on  of  
sound  discussed   on   the   previous  chapter,   Xenakis  builds  various  contras-ng   -mbral     and  
harmonic  densi-es,  defining  the  overall  sonic   scheme  and  forming  the  instrumental  plan  of  
the   work.   The   similarity   with   the   granular   synthesis   is   based   on   the   fact   that   short  
independent   musical   quanta  are  combined   together,   according   to  several  stochas-c   rules,  
and   work   as  ‘long   grains’   to   form   the   various  contras-ng   textures  of   the   work,   regarding  
instrumental   -mbre,   density   and   tension.   As  claimed   in   an   interview   with   Bálint   András  
Varga,   Xenakis‘   goal  was  to  create  a  homogeneous  structure,  based  on  the  probabili-es,  and  
the  same  -me  being  musically   interes-ng  for   the  audience 20.   Although  the   texture  of   the  
Achorripsis  seems  to  be  quite  solid  and  integrated,  the  stochas-c  arrangement   of  the  various  
instrumental  -mbres  determine  the  inner  textural  mo-on   and  modulate  the  overall  tension  
of  the  work.

Regarding   instrumenta-on,  the  matrix  of  Achorripsis  works  as  a  strong  basis  for  se}ng  the  
instrumental   plan   of   the   work.   The   division   of   music   material   into   small   sound   events  

19Linda  M.  Arsenault,    Iannis  Xenakis’s  Achorripsis:  The  Matrix  Game,  Computer  Music  Journal,  Vol.  26  No.  1,  
Spring  2002,  p.  58-­‐72,  p.  58  

20Bálint  András  Varga  (ed),  Aleka  Symeonidou  (tr),  Συνομιλίες  με  τον  Ιάννη  Ξενακη  (Beszèlgetèsek  Iannis  
Xenakisszal),  Potamos,  Athens  2004,  p.  106
8
automa-cally   defines  the  instrumental   needs.   Let’s  take  as  an  example   the  first   50   bars  of  
the  work:

The   pizzicato   material   is   gradually   expanded   into   a   loud,   tu}   passage   in   bar   51.   The  
transi-on  between  the  low  density  of   pizzicato  and  the  high  and  compact  density   of  tu}  is  
achieved   gradually,   by   adding   new   -mbral  groups   in   a   way   that   they   create  a  gradually  
expanding  progress  of  -mbre  and  texture.  In  par-cular,   the  woodwinds  appear  as  a  second  
-mbral  layer   in  bar   6.   Later,   in  bar   13,   the  pizzicato  group   is  supported  by   the  percussion  
(woodblock,   bass  drum   and   by   the   pitch   C8,   performed  by   the  xylophone).   Gradually,   the  
strings   develop   their   music   material   to   reach   the   glissando   part   introduced   in   bar   13.  
Successively,  the  -mbral  development   includes  the  arco  sounds  by  the  strings,  the  expansion  
of   the  woodwind  group  (introduc-on  of   the  bass  clarinet  and  the  contrabassoon)  and  finally  
the   appearance  of   the   brass   group.   The   figure   below   illustrates  this  -mbral  development  
along  with  the  work’s  -meline:

Despite  the  fact   that   the  instrumental-­‐group   sequence  at   the   first   50   bars  of   Achorripsis  
seems  to  be  quite  tradi-onal  (a  gradual  development   of  the  interac-on  between  the  strings  
and   the  woodwind  to   reach   the   tensive   colour   of   brass),   the  stochas-c   character   of   the  
manipula-on   of   the   melodic   and   rhythmical   material   create   the   well   known   Xenakis’  
personal  stylis-c  excep-onality.

Two  further   points  of  instrumental   interest   should  also   be  men-oned.   The  first   one  is  the  
ar-s-c   mixture   among   different   instruments   or   instrumental   groups.   For   instance,   the  
percussive   -mbre  of   Woodblock,   Bass   drum   and   Xylophone  (pitch   C8)   is  mixed   with   the  
strings’   pizzica-   and   supports   their   rhythmical   character.   Furthermore,   the   Piccolo   (and  
occasionally   oboe  and  clarinet)  is  mixed  with  the  high,   sustained  Violin’s   arco  mo-ves  and  
also  supports  the  harmony  and  modulate  the  density  of  the  several  sound-­‐clouds:

9
 Achorripsis  (bars  13-­‐16),  Timbral  mixture  between  Percussion  and  Violins  (pizzicato)

Achorripsis  (bars  24-­‐26),  Timbral  mixture  between  Woodwind  (piccolo,  clarinet  and  
bass  clarinet)  and  violins  (pizzicato)

Iannis  Xenakis,  Achorripsis,  ΒΟΤΕ  &  ΒΟCK,  Berlin  1958

The  second  point   of  Achorripsis’   instrumental  interest   can   be  found  at   the  mathema-cal/
stochas-c   manipula-on  of  music  material  to  create  various  contras-ng  textures  among  the  
instrumental   groups.   A   characteris-c   example   could   be   both   the   gradual  and   the   direct  
textural   transi-on   among   the   various   instrumental   colours.   In   par-cular,   the   poin-lis-c  
texture  of  the  very   beginning  (strings  pizzica-)  is  developed  and  appears  three  more  -mes  in  
bars  47-­‐49,  72-­‐76  and  87-­‐89   (performed  by   strings/arco,   non-­‐pitched   percussion  and  brass  
respec-vely):

10
All  the  above  passages  are  placed  (stochas-cally   or   not)   wisely   between  tu}   passages  to  
keep  the  idea  of  contrast  (and  consequently  the  auditor’s  interest)  in  high  level.

Conclusions

In   conclusion,   Xenakis’   methodology   has   been   a  powerful   tool  for   the   instrumental  and  
orchestral  syntax.   The  -mbral  shaping   was  based  on  innova-ve  ideas,  which  were  irrelevant  
to  the  music  art  of  that  period,   and  played  a  significant  role  to  the  development  of  both  the  
philosophical   and   formalised   instrumental   and   orchestral   thought.   Although   history   has  
proved  that   the   same  results  can   be  achieved  following   different   methods,   the  stochas-c  
ways,  Xenakis  used  for   the  instrumental  grouping,   extracted  new  orchestral  -mbres,   which  
may   not   had   been   achieved   by   using   the   ‘tradi-onal’   methodology.   The   introduc-on   of  
irrelevant  ideas  to   the  musical   thought  of  that  period  was  a  key   for  Xenakis  to  develop  his  
personal   way   of   controlling   the   musical   masses/clouds   and   differen-ated   him   by   the  
genera-on  of  the  other  contemporary  composers,  whose  composi-onal  research  focuses  on  
similar   areas.   Undoubtedly,   Xenakis   developed  a  highly   originated   composi-onal  language  
which  proved   to  be  a  substan-al  opening  to  new  ways  of   thinking.   Xenakis’   formalisa-on  
flourished  with  what  history  calls  ‘spectral  music’  of  the  past  century  and  nowadays.

11
4. Bibliography

Linda  M.  Arsenault,    Iannis  Xenakis’s  Achorripsis:  The  Matrix  Game,  Computer  Music  
Journal,  Vol.  26  No.  1,  Spring  2002,  p.  58-­‐72

Carse  Adam,  History  of  Orchestra1on,  Dover,  New  York  1964

Andy  Hamilton,  Aesthe1cs  &  Music,  Con-nuum,  New  York  2007

Evan  Jones,  An  Acous1c  Analysis  of  Col  Legno  Ar1cula1on  in  Iannis  Xenakis’s  Nomos  Alpha,  
Computer  Music  Journal,  Vol.  26  No.  1,  Spring  2002,  p.  73-­‐86

Rober  Morgan,  Twen1eth  Century  Music,  Norton,  USA  1991

Gerard  Pape,  Iannis  Xenakis  and  the  ‘Real’  of  Musical  Composi1on,  Computer  Music  
Journal,  Vol.  26  No.  1,  Spring  2002  ,  p.  16-­‐21

BrigiMe  Robindoré,  Eskhaté  Ereuna:  Extending  the  limits  of  musical  thought  -­‐  Comments  on  
and  by  Iannis  Xenakis,  Computer  Music  Journal,  Vol.  20  No.  4,  1996,  p.  11-­‐16

Marie-­‐Hélène  Serra,  Stochas1c  Composi1on  and  Stochas1c  Timbre,  Perspec-ves  of  New  
Music,  Vol.  31  No.  1,  Winter  1993,  236-­‐257

Makis  Solomos,  The  Unity  of  Xenakis’  Instrumental  and  Eectroacous1c  Music:  The  Case  for  
‘Brownian  Movements’,  Perspec-ves  of  New  Music,  Vol.  39  No.  1,  Winter  2001,  p.  244-­‐254

Makis  Solomos  (ed)  and  Tina  Plyta  (tr),  Ιάννης  Ξενάκης  -­‐  Κείμενα  περί  Μουσικής  και  
Αρχιτεκτονικής  (Iannis  Xenakis  -­‐  Texts  on  Music  and  Architecture),  Psichogios,  Athens  2001

Roland  Squibbs,  Xenakis  in  Miniature:  Style  and  Structure  in  ‘á  r.  (Hommage  á  Ravel)’  for  
Piano  (1987),  Perspec-ves  of  New  Music,  Vol.  41  No.  1,  Winter  2003,  p.  120-­‐153

Richard  Taruskin,  Music  in  the  late  twen1eth  century,  Oxford  University  Press,  USA  2005
Fred  L.  Whipple,  Stochas1c  Pain1ng,  Leonardo,  Vol.  1  No.  1,  January  1968,  p.  81-­‐83

Bálint  András  Varga  (ed),  Aleka  Symeonidou  (tr),  Συνομιλίες  με  τον  Ιάννη  Ξενακη  
(Beszèlgetèsek  Iannis  Xenakisszal),  Potamos,  Athens  2004

Iannis  Xenakis,  Roberta  Brown,  John  Rahn,  Xenakis  on  Xenakis,  Perspec-ves  on  New  Music,  
Vol.  25  No.  1/2,  Winter/Summer  1987,  p.  16-­‐63

Iannis  Xenakis,  Formalized  Music,  Pendragon  Press,  New  York  1992

Iannis  Xenakis.  Towards  a  Metamusic,  Tempo,  New  series,  No.  93,  Summer  1970,  p.  2-­‐29

Iannis  Xenakis,  Achorripsis  (Full  Score),  ΒΟΤΕ  &  ΒΟCK,  Berlin  1958

13