The Fourth Movement of György Ligetis Piano Concerto - Investigat PDF

City University of New York (CUNY)
CUNY Academic Works
All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects
Projects
9-2016
The Fourth Movement of György Ligeti's Piano Concerto:

Investigating the Musical-Mathematical Connection
Cynthia L. Wong
The Graduate Center, City University of New York
How does access to this work benefit you? Let us know!

More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/1521
Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu
This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY).
Contact: AcademicWorks@cuny.edu

THE FOURTH MOVEMENT OF
GYÖRGY LIGETI’S PIANO CONCERTO:
INVESTIGATING THE MUSICAL-MATHEMATICAL CONNECTION
by
CYNTHIA LEE WONG
A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Music in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
The City University of New York

2016

© 2016
Cynthia Lee Wong
All Rights Reserved
ii

THE FOURTH MOVEMENT OF
GYÖRGY LIGETI’S PIANO CONCERTO:
INVESTIGATING THE MUSICAL-MATHEMATICAL CONNECTION
by
CYNTHIA LEE WONG
This manuscript has been read and accepted for the Graduate Faculty in Music
to satisfy the dissertation requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
8/18/16 Jeff Nichols
Date Chair of the Examining Committee
8/18/16 Norman Carey
Date Executive Officer
David Olan (Advisor)
Joseph N. Straus (First Reader)
Norman Carey
Jeff Nichols
Supervisory Committee
iii

Abstract
The Fourth Movement of György Ligeti’s Piano Concerto:
Investigating the Musical-Mathematical Connection
by
Cynthia Lee Wong
Advisor: Professor David Olan
This interdisciplinary study explores musical-mathematical analogies in the fourth
movement of Ligeti’s Piano Concerto. Its aim is to connect musical analysis with the piece’s
mathematical inspiration. For this purpose, the dissertation is divided into two sections. Part I
(Chapters 1-2) provides musical and mathematical context, including an explanation of ideas
related to Ligeti’s mathematical inspiration. Part II (Chapters 3-5) delves into an analysis of the
rhythm, form, melody / motive, and harmony. Appendix A is a reduced score of the entire
movement, labeled according to my analysis.
iv

For my beloved mother and father
v

Acknowledgements
First, I would like to extend my genuine gratitude to the Graduate Center, City University
of New York for supporting my studies and teaching with an Enhanced Chancellor’s Fellowship.
Second, I am especially grateful to my advisor David Olan and first reader Joseph N. Straus for
their encouragement, advice, and timely feedback throughout the entire dissertation process. The
list of people who have taught, nurtured, and encouraged me is truly Leporellian. I include only
a few and apologize to those whom I have inadvertently omitted: Samuel Adler, the late Milton
Babbitt, Norman Carey, Wojciech Czerwinski, Kae Fujisawa, Sun-Young Kim, Adrienne
Lotson, Marc Neikrug, Jeff Nichols, Lawrence Putterman, David and Lea Soifer, Anne Swartz,
Andrew Tomasello, and Christina Lee Wong.
vi

Table of Contents
List of Tables xii
List of Figures xiii
List of Examples xv
Part I: Mathematical and Musical Context 1
Chapter 1: Ligeti and Fractals 2

Introduction of Mathematical Concepts 2
1.1 Fractals 2
1.2 Chaos 6
Musical Context 12
Ligeti’s Approach to Composition 12
1.3 Ligeti’s Late Style 12

1.4 Extramusical Associations 15
1.5 Visual Stimuli 17
1.6 Ligeti’s ‘Intuitive’ Composing Process? 18
1.7 Mathematics and Science in Ligeti’s Composing Process? 21
1.8 Ligeti’s Fondness for Numerical Sequences 23
1.9 Ligeti’s Thoughts on Mathematical ‘Findings’ in Analysis of His Music 28
Ligeti’s Relation to Mathematics

30
1.10 Ligeti’s Background in Science and Mathematics 30
1.11 Ligeti’s “Pre-fractal” vs. “Fractal” Thinking 31
1.12 Ligeti’s “Pre-Chaotic” vs. “Chaotic” Thinking 37
1.13 Friendships with Heinz-Otto Peitgen and Benoît Mandelbrot 44
vii

46
Ligeti’s Piano Concerto
1.14 The Creation of the Piano Concerto 46

1.15 The compositional thinking behind the fourth movement 50
Chapter 2: Explanation of Mathematical Concepts 52
Inspiration 52
2.1 Mathematical inspiration for the fourth movement: ‘the Maelstrom’ 52

and ‘29 Arms at SeahorseValley’
Julia and Mandelbrot Sets 54
2.2 The ‘Ligeti fractal’ as a Julia Set 54
2.3 A Brief Introduction to Julia and Mandelbrot Sets 55
2.4 Correlations between Julia and Mandelbrot Sets 56
Constructing Julia and Mandelbrot Sets 60
2.5 Iterating Mandelbrot Sets 60
2.6 Iterating Julia Sets 65
2.7 Graphing on the Complex Plane 66
2.8 Connected and Disconnected Julia Sets 68
A Deeper Study of Chaotic Systems 70
2.9 The Logistic Map: Periodic, Chaotic, and Intermittent Behavior 70
2.10 The U-Sequence 72
2.11 Self-Similarity in the Logistic Map 73
2.12 A Closer Look at the Butterfly Effect 74
2.13 The Lorenz Attractor 76
Ideas from Douglas Hofstadter 78
2.14 Broader Connections with Gödel’s Theorem of Inconsistency 78
viii

Part II: Analysis of the Fourth Movement of Ligeti’s Piano Concerto 80
Chapter 3: Rhythm / Form 81
3.1 Overview of Chapters 3-5 81
3.2 Summary of Mathematical Concepts Aspects 82
3.3 An Underlying Rhythmic Pattern 83
The Rhythm as “Fractal” and “Chaotic” 87
3.4 Fractal Aspect I –An “Irregular and Very Fragmented” Rhythmic

Surface 87
3.5 Fractal Aspect 2 – Self-Similarity at Multiple Scales 92
3.6 Fractal Aspect 2 – the Fourth Movement Form as An Extension of

Rhythm 96
3.7 Fractal Aspect 3 – Simplicity à Complexity and Space-Filling

Tendency 98
3.8 Fractal Aspect 4 - Iteration 103
3.9 Fractal Aspect 5 – “Focusing on smaller and smaller details” 103
3.10 Chaos Aspect 1 (Juxtaposition of Order and Disorder) and Chaos 104
Aspect 3 (Absence of Exact Repetition)
3.11 Logistic Map Correlation – The U-Sequence – and Chaos Aspect 4 105
(Intermittency)
3.12 Mandelbrot and Julia Sets Aspects 1 and 2 (escape sequences and 111
disconnectedness)
ix

Chapter 4: Melody / Motive 112
4.1 Overview of the Melody / Motive 112
The Melody / Motive as “Fractal and Chaotic” 113
4.2 Fractal Aspect I – “Irregular and Very Fragmented” 113
Fractal Aspect 2 – Self-Similarity 119
4.3 Motivic Self-Similarity 119
4.4 Gesture 1 122
4.5 Gesture 2 126
4.6 Gesture 3 128
4.7 Self-Similarity within the 12-tone series 130
4.8 The Major Seventh Chord 133
4.9 The Major-Minor Tetrachord [0347] 137
4.10 The Dominant Seventh Chord 140
4.11 Melodic Fractals 147
The 9-10-11-12 Unit 150
4.12 Chaos Aspect 1 – Juxtaposition of Order and Disorder: Secret Order

revealed in the Long-Term 150
4.13 Fractal Aspect 4 – Iteration 156
Error Amplification 157
4.14 Chaos Aspect 2 – the Butterfly Effect – and Gödel’s theorem of 157
Inconsistency and Incompleteness
x

Chapter 5: Harmony 171
Overview of the Harmony 171
5.1 Surface Harmony as Based on the 12-Tone Series and Two Main 171
Hexachords
5.2 Surface Harmony as Subsets or Supersets of the 2 Main Hexachords 176
5.3 Deep-Level Harmony as Consisting of Prime Forms 183
5.4 Interaction Between Prime Forms 188
The Harmony as “Fractal and Chaotic” 197
Fractal Aspect 2 – “Self-Similarity at Multiple Scales” 197
5.5 The [014589] Hexachord as Sequences of Prime Forms Toward the End of
the Movement 197
5.6 Correspondences Among First Appearances of Main Prime Forms, the 12- 200
Tone Series, and the [014589] hexachord
Fractal Aspect 3 – “Simplicity to Complexity” / Space-Filling Property 203
5.7 Fractal 3 – Harmony Demonstrating Space-Filling Tendencies 203
5.8 The Combination of Self-Similar Units Building up to Larger Ones 205
5.9 Chaos Aspect 1 – Juxtaposition of Order and Disorder 207
5.10 Conclusion 208
Appendix A: Reduced Score of Ligeti, Piano Concerto, fourth movement, 209

analysis
Bibliography 246
xi

List of Tables
Table 1.1 Ratios of adjacent Fibonacci numbers 26
Table 2.1 An escape vs. prisoner set 61
Table 2.2 Iterations at z(0) = 0 and c = -0.5 64
Table 2.3 An escape vs. prisoner sets 65
Table 4.1 List of overt 9-10-11-12 unit appearances in the fourth movement 150
Table 4.2 Rhythmic chart of Ligeti, Horn Trio, third movement 170
Table 5.1 Dyad strings in the fourth movement 178
Table 5.2 First appearances of prime forms regardless of talea 200
Table 5.3 Talea 1 – first appearances of prime forms 200
Table 5.4 Talea 2 – first appearances of prime forms 201
Table 5.5 Chart of deep-level prime forms for Supercycles #1-21 203
xii

List of Figures
Figure 1.1 Visual representations of fractals 3
Figure 1.2 Iteration of fractal structures 4
Figure 1.3 The Mandelbrot set 6
Figure 1.4 Fractal results from the Chaos Game 8
Figure 1.5 Ligeti, sketch of a butterfly 10
Figure 1.6 Ligeti, Apparitions sketch 26
Figure 2.1 The ‘Ligeti fractal’ 53
Figure 2.2 ‘The Maelstrom,’ a magnified portion of the ‘Ligeti fractal’ 53
Figure 2.3 Various Julia sets 54
Figure 2.4 Julia sets corresponding to points on the Mandelbrot set 56
Figure 2.5 The Mandelbrot Set with “bulbs” 57
Figure 2.6 Seahorse tails in ‘Seahorse Valley’ 58
Figure 2.7 “Figure 15” from Peitgen and Richter’s The Beauty of Fractals 59
Figure 2.8 c = -1, c = -0.5, and c = 1 on the Mandelbrot set 62
Figure 2.9 The Julia set at c = 0 66
Figure 2.10 Complex c-values graphed on the Mandelbrot set 67
Figure 2.11 The first eight stages in the construction of Cantor dust 68
Figure 2.12 The first eight stages in the construction of a Julia Cantor set 68
Figure 2.13 The logistic map showing the “route from order to chaos” 70
Figure 2.14 Correlation between the logistic map and the Mandelbrot set 73
Figure 2.15 The Lorenz attractor 76
Figure 2.16 Inconsistency in mathematical systems 79
xiii

Figure 3.1 Zoom sequence into the Mandelbrot set 93
Figure 3.2 The Mandelbrot set at 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, and 2000 steps 105
Figure 4.1 Escher, Butterflies wood engraving 121
Figure 5.1 Subsets and supersets of 6-34 or [013579] and 6-32 or [024579] 175
xiv

List of Examples
Example 1.1 The 12-tone series and pentachordal combinations in a 1980 Piano 20
Concerto sketch
Example 1.2 Ligeti, Piano Concerto, 1985-6 sketch with numerical patterns 24
Example 1.3 Micropolyphony as a characteristic device in Ligeti’s middle period 32
Example 1.4 Ligeti, Piano Concerto, fourth movement, showing increasing density 34
Example 1.5 Polyrhythm in Ligeti’s Continuum (mm. 1-12) 41
Example 1.6 Ligeti, Désordre, first 7 accented notes and peaks of phrases in the R.H. 42
Example 1.7 Ligeti, Désordre, peaks of phrases in the R.H.’s first cycle 42
Example 1.8 The fourth movement’s beginning 3-note motive in a July-September 48

1980 Piano Concerto sketch
Example 1.9 The fourth movement’s beginning 3-motive in a November 26, 1981 49
Piano Concerto sketch
Example 3.1 Ligeti, sketch revealing the fourth movement’s rhythmic pattern 83
Example 3.2 Incorrect alignment of Talea 1 86
Example 3.3 Correct alignment of first 12 measures 86
Example 3.4 mm. 13-24 expressing incomplete rhythmic cycles 88
Example 3.5 Talea 1’s complete rhythmic cycles with frequent changes of 90
instrumentation (mm. 148-155)
Example 3.6 “Rhythmic fractals” at mm. 116-118 95
Example 3.7 m. 1 and the ‘return’ at mm. 65-66 97
Example 3.8 Talea 1’s Cycles 1-4 (mm. 1-6) containing a majority of silence 98
Example 3.9 Talea 1’s Cycles 10 and 11 (mm. 14-17) with sustained notes that 99
create the illusion of ‘space’
Example 3.10 Talea 1’s Cycle 53-54 (mm. 79-81) containing more sounding attacks 100

xv

Example 3.11 Talea 1’s Cycles 65-72 (mm. 97-108) middle of the movement with 101
more articulated attacks
Example 3.12 Talea 1’s Cycle 93-103 (mm. 139-155) with all attacks articulated, 102
except at m. 141 and m. 142
Example 3.13 U-Sequence at mm. 127-141 106
Example 3.14 U-Sequence foreshadowing at mm. 57-60 107
Example 3.15 piano (mm. 141-146) reaching the highest possible pitch, articulation, 108
and dynamic to lowest possible pitch, lightest articulation, and dynamic
Example 3.16 Extreme range at mm. 153-154 with piccolo low notes and double 109
bass harmonics
Example 3.17 Double accents suggestion climax 109
Example 3.18 Accumulated dynamics 110
Example 4.1 Prime forms of the 12-tone series 112
Example 4.2 Gestural directions correlating with the 12-tone series 114
Example 4.3 First appearances of Gestures 1-3 (m. 1, mm. 7-8, and mm. 19-20) 114
Example 4.4 Gestures 1-3 as creating an “irregular and very fragmented” surface 115
(mm. 1-10)
Example 4.5 Gestures 1-3 creating an “irregular and very fragmented” surface 116
(mm. 92-94)
Example 4.6 Talea 1’s mm. 127-141, piano, full harmonic statements 117
Example 4.7 Talea 2’s mm. 130-144, full linear statements 118
Example 4.8 Gesture 1 ‘model’ at m. 1 compared to Gesture 1 at mm. 65-66 123
Example 4.9 Gesture 1 at mm. 10-11 compared to Gesture 1 at m. 102 124
Example 4.10 More manifestations of Gesture 1 as typically assertive, ascending in 125

contour, with a SL rhythm
Example 4.11 Gesture 2 ‘model’ at mm. 7-8 compared to Gesture 2 at mm. 107-108 126
Example 4.12 Gesture 2 at mm. 11-12 compared to Gesture 2 at mm. 109-110 127
xvi

Example 4.13 Gesture 2 at m. 79 compared to Gesture 2 at m. 85 128
Example 4.14 Gesture 3 ‘model’ at mm. 19-20 compared with Gesture 3 at mm. 22- 129
23
Example 4.15 More Gesture 3s with Gesture 1 ‘links’ 129
Example 4.16 Self-similarities within the 12-tone series 131
Example 4.17 The mapping of Gesture 3’s pitch order position-numbers 9, 10, 11, 131
12, 1 à Gesture 1’s 1, 4, 12, 2, 3
Example 4.18 Major seventh chords at mm. 54-56 with traits of Gesture 2 133
(augmentation) and Gesture 3 (zigzag contour)
Example 4.19 The major seventh chord at mm. 17-18 with neither Gesture 2’s 134
augmentation or Gesture 3’s diminution
Example 4.20 Major seventh chord at m. 83 behaving more as Gesture 3 (with 135
diminution) than Gesture 2
Example 4.21 Major seventh chord at m. 103 behaving more as Gesture 3 (with 136
diminution and zigzag contour) than Gesture 2
Example 4.22 Major seventh chords at mm. 121-122 expressing Gesture 3 (with 137
diminution and zigzag contours) rather than Gesture 2
Example 4.23 Tetrachord [0347] at m. 26 as combining Gesture 1’s rising contour 138
with Gesture 3’s diminution
Example 4.24 Context of tetrachord [0347] at m. 26, showing that it can be analyzed 138
as either Gesture 3 or Gesture 1
Example 4.25 Tetrachord [0347] at mm. 119-120 as behaving as a ‘pivot’ from 139
Gesture 3’s pitch order position-numbers 11, 12, 1, 10 à Gesture 1’s 12, 2, 3, 4
Example 4.26 The [0347] tetrachord at mm. 125-126 behaving as a ‘pivot’ with 140
Gesture 3’s pitch order position-numbers 10, 11, 12, 1 à Gesture 1’s 12, 2, 3, 4
Example 4.27 The dominant seventh chord as a ‘pivot’ at m. 105 from Gesture 3’s 141
pitch order position-numbers 9, 10, 11, 12 à Gesture 1’s 12, 1, 2, 4
Example 4.28 Dominant seventh chords at mm. 106-107 behaving as Gesture 3 141

xvii

Example 4.29 The dominant seventh chord at mm. 71-72 behaving as Gesture 3 143
(with zigzag contour) and the [026] fragment at mm. 72-73 interpreted as Gesture 1
(with a rising contour)
Example 4.30 The [026] fragment at m. 84 interpreted as Gesture 1 (on P4) and 144
Gesture 3 (on P9)
Example 4.31 The brass notes at mm. 86-87 filling in the ‘gap’ by beginning with 144
P4’s pitch order position-number 3 and continuing with 5, 6, 7
Example 4.32 The [026] fragment at mm. 89-90 interpreted as Gesture 1 (on P0) and 145
Gesture 3 (on P5)
Example 4.33 The [026] fragment at m. 139 interpreted as Gesture 1 (on P7) and 146
Gesture 3 (on P0)
Example 4.34 Melodic fractals at mm. 19-23 147
Example 4.35 Melodic fractals at m. 105 148
Example 4.38 Melodic fractals (double bass) at mm. 123-126 149
Example 4.39 The [014589] hexachord in the 12-tone series and its tonal fragments 151
Example 4.40 The [014589] hexachord as constructed from smaller self-similar units 152
[014]
Example 4.41 The 9-10-11-12 unit at mm. 80-81 as hidden and unordered 153
Example 4.42 The 9-10-11-12 unit at mm. 99-100 as unordered and missing pitch 153
order position-number 9
Example 4.43 The 9-10-11-12 unit at mm. 106-107 as containing ‘errors’ 153
Example 4.44 The 9-10-11-12 unit’s first obvious statement at m. 111 154
Example 4.45 Clear statements of the 9-10-11-12 unit 154
Example 4.46 The 9-10-11-12 unit as split between instruments 155
Example 4.47 Increased presence of ‘errors’ (marked with * and circled) toward the 158
end of the movement
xviii

Example 4.48 Mild ‘errors’ at m. 149 in Violins 1 and 2 164
Example 4.49 Mild ‘errors’ at m. 150 in the oboe/horn/double bass 165
Example 4.50 Mild ‘errors’ at m. 151 in the trumpet/trombone 166
Example 4.51 Mild ‘errors’ in the trumpet and drastic ‘errors’ in the trombone at mm. 167
151-152
Example 4.52 Drastic ‘errors’ at m. 153 in the horn 168
Example 4.53 A genuine error at mm. 50-51 in the rhythm 169
Example 5.1 Tonal or quasi-tonal harmonies within the 12-tone series 171
Example 5.2 The [014589] hexachord within the 9-10-11-12 unit 172
Example 5.3 Two primary hexachords in the fourth movement 173
Example 5.4 Primary hexachords in the 12-tone series 176
Example 5.5 The first three dyads as initial appearances of Gestures 1-3 177
Example 5.6 Piano’s full series build-up at mm. 127-141 180
Example 5.7 Full series at mm. 130-144 182
Example 5.8 Phrases with large doublings (i.e. pentachords, hexachords, 184
septachords, and octachords) at mm. 123-129
Example 5.9 The lowest strand as expressed as the loudest 186
Example 5.10: Segmental invariance among prime forms a [2], [4], [6], or [7] apart 189
Example 5.11 Piano at mm. 26-28 (P1/8 à P4) 191
Example 5.12 mm. 51-53, similar-phrase pairing (P10 à P4) 192
Example 5.13 mm. 55-56, major seventh chord (P4 confirmed) 193
Example 5.14 mm. 57-59 (P4 à P6 à P1) 194
Example 5.15 mm. 60-62 (P1 à P9) 195
Example 5.16 mm. 62-63 (P9) 196
xix

Example 5.17 Hexachord [014589] as sequences of prime forms in the piano at mm. 198
127-146
Example 5.18 Talea 2’s prime forms at mm. 130-146 199
Example 5.19 Return to ‘home’ prime form P1 at m. 154 199
Example 5.20 Duplications of [014] subsets in the [014589] hexachord 202
Example 5.21 Harmonic accumulation of [015] at mm. 20-21 205
Example 5.22 Harmonic accumulation of [2] or [037] at m. 46 206
Example 5.23 Harmonic accumulation of self-similar units at mm. 71-73 206
Example 5.24 Harmonic accumulation of self-similar units at mm. 94-95 207
xx
Part 1: Mathematical and Musical Context
1
Chapter 1: Ligeti and Fractals
Introduction of Mathematical Concepts
1.1 Fractals
In “On My Piano Concerto” (1988), Ligeti referred to his 1984 experience of making
“musical associations” with “remarkable pictures of fractal structures [Mandelbrot and Julia sets]
produced by two Bremen scientists, [Heinz-Otto] Peitgen and [Peter H.] Richter.”1 Such
pictures, Ligeti asserted, “played an important role in [his] musical conceptions,” 2 including
those of the Piano Concerto’s fourth movement. The fractal connection is also evident from
Ligeti’s descriptions of the movement as “a fractal piece”3 and “fractal in time.”4
According to Benoît Mandelbrot, who invented the term ‘fractal’ and whom Ligeti
befriended, fractals refer to “certain geometric shapes whose form is very irregular and very
fragmented…Fractals are characterized by the coexistence of distinctive features of every
conceivable linear size.”5 Figure 1.1 provides visual representations of fractal structures,
showing irregular and fragmented shapes as well as self-similarity, which involves the
replication of the same geometric relationships on multiple scales. In Figure 1.1, such
relationships are visually apparent, with the whole is mirrored in the parts and vice versa. In the
Koch Snowflake, each ‘hand’ of the snowflake appears as a miniature version of the whole. The
1
György Ligeti, “On My Piano Concerto,” trans. Robert Cogan (Sonus 9/1, 1988): 12.
2
Ibid., 12.
3
György Ligeti, conversation with Heinz-Otto Peitgen and Richard Steinitz, November, 1993,
Huddersfield Festival, quoted in Richard Steinitz, “The Dynamics of Disorder,” The Musical Times Vol.
137, no. 1839 (May 1996): 8.
4
György Ligeti, conversations with Richard Steinitz, February 25-27, 2000, quoted in Richard Steinitz,
György Ligeti: Music of the Imagination (London: Faber and Faber, 2003), 328.
5
Benoît Mandelbrot, The Fractal Geometry of Nature (New York: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1982),
282.
2
Sierpinski Triangle consists of several copies of itself. The Cantor Set likewise duplicates itself
at smaller and smaller scales.
A B C
Figure 1.1 Visual representations of fractals. A, The Koch Snowflake.6 B, The Sierpinski
Triangle.7 C, The Cantor Set8 (omission of starting segment, mine)
The creation of fractals involves a process called iteration, “a form of feedback based on
recursion.”9 In other words, some process is repeated over and over again to achieve a certain
result. Ligeti was aware of iteration, as he described the fourth movement as having “melodic
sources…that are built into an iterated, that is to say, feedback system. The music starts very
thinly, with isolated figures; it gradually thickens in that the figures are multiplied with
6
Wrtlprnfl, “Koch curve in its 7th iteration,” Wikimedia Commons, September 28, 2006.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Koch_snowflake#/media/File:Koch_Snowflake_7th_iteration.svg.
7
Aleksander11774, “Sierpinski’s Triangle,” Wikispaces, March 22, 2012. https://sierpinski-
wiki.wikispaces.com/file/view/Triangle.png/313693774/378x237/Triangle.png.
8
Sarang, “Cantor Set in seven iterations,” Wikimedia Commons, December 25, 2010.
http://mathforum.org/mathimages/imgUpload/755px-Cantor.png.
9
Richard Bird, Chaos and Life: Complexity and Order in Evolution and Thought (New
York: Columbia University Press, 2003), 4.
3
themselves.”10 Figure 1.2 shows iteration in the creation of the fractal structures from Figure
1.1, demonstrating how figures can be “multiplied with themselves.”
Figure 1.2 Iteration of fractal structures. A, The Koch snowflake.11 For each step, two sides of a
triangle are added to each side of the geometric shape. Space is filled upon iteration. B, The
Sierpinski Triangle.12 With each step, smaller triangles (in white) are added within larger
triangles (in black). Space is filled upon iteration. C, The Cantor set.13 With each step, the middle
third of a segment is removed. Space is created upon iteration.
10
György Ligeti, in Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 149 (May 1988): 19, quoted in Constantin Floros, György
Ligeti: Beyond Avante-Garde and Postmodernism, trans. Ernest Bernhardt-Kabish (New York: Peter
Lang, 2014), 143.
11
Ken Perlin, “Printing a snowflake,” Ken’s Blog, December 12, 2010. http://blog.kenperlin.com/wp-
content/uploads/2010/12/koch-snowflake-progression.gif.
12
Rod Pierce, “Sierpinski Triangle,” Math is Fun, August 14, 2014.
https://www.mathsisfun.com/images/sierpinski-triangle-evolution.gif.
13
Ncetm_administrator, “Introducing fractal ideas, part 2,” Secondary Magazine Issue 73, November 16,
2010. https://content.ncetm.org.uk/images/microsites/secondary_magazine/issue_73/73_11.gif.
4
I include Mandelbrot’s general portrayal of fractals, rather than a strict mathematical
definition, because a broad description proves more useful for interdisciplinary study. Indeed,
distinguishing characteristics of mathematical topics can be more meaningfully integrated than
precise definitions of the concepts themselves. This is largely due to inherent differences
between music and math which prevent or discourage literal translation. Additionally, Ligeti
was careful not to call himself a mathematician.
In the case of fractals, a strict definition would limit their incorporation to the imaginary
realm. This is because their definition involves exact self-similarity (meaning that the geometric
relationships are invariant14 under changes of scale), a Hausdorff dimension (which refers to a
dimension whose exponent is not an integer),15 and infinite iteration, which does not exist in
reality. Because we cannot show perpetual iteration of the Koch snowflake, Sierpinski triangle,
and Cantor set, the images shown in Figures 1.1 and 1.2 are not true fractals but visual
representations of them. Likewise, nature does not contain true fractals (since absolute self-
similarity does not happen in nature) but rather, fractal structures. Nor do true fractals exist in
the fourth movement of Ligeti’s Piano Concerto. Instead, ‘fractal’ is used flexibly, referring to
some combination of distinguishing characteristics. Even the Mandelbrot set (Figure 1.3), which
was featured in Peitgen and Richter’s 1984 study, is “not truly fractal by most definitions,”16
despite the tendency for it to be recognized as ‘fractal.’ What is meant by ‘fractal’ often refers to
‘quasi-fractal’ or ‘pseudo-fractal’ because the distinguishing characteristics of ‘fractal’ are taken
14
Invariance refers to relationships that are completely the same.
15
We usually think in terms of 1, 2, or 3 dimensions (i.e. a line, a square, a cube). Fractals, however,
have dimensions that are not integers. The Sierpinski Triangle, for instance, has a dimension of
approximately 1.585, meaning that it is between dimensions 1 and 2.
16
Benoît Mandelbrot, from an interview in the film Fractals: An Animated Discussion, quoted in Heinz-
Otto Peitgen, Peter Richter, and Dietmar Saupe, Chaos and Fractals: New Frontiers of Science, 2nd ed.
(New York: Springer-Verlag Inc., 2004), 783.
5
to stand for ‘fractal’ itself. Therefore, when I use the word ‘fractal,’ it more accurately refers to
something ‘quasi-fractal’ or ‘pseudo-fractal,’ rather than the strict definition of the word.
Figure 1.3 The Mandelbrot set17
1.2 Chaos
Chaos (also known as deterministic chaos) is often discussed in conjunction with fractals
because of its unique kinship with fractals. A useful clarification of the relationship between
chaos and fractals is found in Chaos and Fractals, a book co-authored by Peitgen:
When we examine the development of a process over a period of time, we speak

in terms of chaos theory. When we are more interested in the structural forms
which a chaotic process leaves in its wake, then we use the terminology of
fractal geometry, which is really the geometry whose structures are what give
order to chaos.18
17
Kevin Wayne, “The Mandelbrot Set,” November 26, 2006.
https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~wayne/mandel/mandel-bw.jpg.
18
Peitgen, Jürgens, and Saupe, Chaos and Fractals, vi-vii.
6
In essence, fractals are “the geometry of chaos and self-similarity” in which “the replication of a
greater whole in its smaller parts is a typical attribute of chaos.”19 Additionally, Ligeti’s
awareness of chaos is evident in the creation of his first piano study Désordre, which Ligeti
considered a “concealed homage to the new science of deterministic chaos.” 20
An example of how chaotic processes leave fractal traces is the Chaos Game, in which
random (though repetitive) processes result in a fractal structure. Although there are several
versions of the Chaos Game, I outline instructions for a simple version below:
1. Label the three vertices of an equilateral triangle: 1, 2, and 3.

2. Assign each vertex to a side of a 3-sided die.
3. Choose any vertex as a starting point.
4. Roll the die to choose another vertex.
5. If the vertex is the same as the starting point, ignore the result and roll again.
6. Plot the midpoint between the starting point and the vertex determined by Step 4.
7. This midpoint becomes the starting point for the next iteration.
After about a thousand iterations of Steps 4, 6, and 7, the plotted midpoints result in a fuzzy
image of the Sierpinski Triange. After ten thousand iterations, we have a clear picture of the
Sierpinski Triangle (Figure 1.4).
19
Heinz-Otto Peitgen, “Continuum, Chaos, and Metronomes – A Fractal Friendship,” in
György Ligeti: Of Foreign Lands and Strange Sounds, ed. Louise Duchesneau and Wolfgang Marx
(Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer, 2011),101-2.
20
György Ligeti, “Polyrhythmik in den Klavieretüden” lecture in Gütersloh on May 5, 1990, quoted and
translated in Hartmuth Kinzler, “Decision and Automatism in ‘Désordre,’ 1re Etude, Premiere Livre,”
Interface 20, no. 2 (1991): 89.
7
Figure 1.4 Fractal results from the Chaos Game21
In Chaos and Fractals, Peitgen, Jürgens, and Saupe described the Chaos Game as an example of
“how randomness can create a perfectly deterministic shape.”22 They elaborated:
To put it still another way, if we follow the time process step by step, we cannot
predict where the next game point [plotted midpoint] will land because it is
determined by throwing a die. But nevertheless, the pattern which all the game
points together leave behind is absolutely predictable. This demonstrates an
interesting interplay between randomness and deterministic fractals.23
A significant aspect of chaos, therefore, is its juxtaposition of order and disorder. While in the
short-term, an action appears random, in the long-term, a secret order is revealed.
Another important aspect is a chaotic system’s sensitivity to initial conditions. Such
sensitivity refers to the system’s susceptibility to tiny changes, which explode into monumental
change. Therefore, a system that seems orderly and predictable over the short term can become
21
Peitgen, Jürgens, and Saupe, Chaos and Fractals, 279, figure 6.2.
22
Ibid., 279.
23
Ibid.
8
chaotic and unpredictable through exponential error proliferation. This “amplification of error”24
is more popularly known as the butterfly effect, in reference to an essay by Edward Lorenz.25 As
Peitgen, Jürgens, and Saupe wrote in Chaos and Fractals: “In principle, the future is completely
determined by the past; but in practice small uncertainties, much like minute errors of
measurement which enter into calculations, are amplified, with the effect that even though
behavior is predictable in the short term, it is unpredictable over the long term.”26
Ligeti’s understanding of the butterfly effect is apparent in his response to a question
about performances of his music:
BAV: [I]n looking at the performance history of your works over the past thirty
years, what conclusions do you draw for yourself?
GL: I think performances occur by chance, rather like self-organization in

biology, sociology, culture, or national economy. In the early 1960s, the US
meteorologist and mathematician Edward Lorenz used a beautiful metaphor: the
flap of a butterfly’s wing in Brazil has a bearing on whether there will be a
storm in New York the day after [the ‘butterfly effect’]. In other words, a little
plus or a little minus somewhere suffices to trigger…
BAV: …a chain reaction. 27
The inspiration of the butterfly effect is also apparent in a drawing on one of Ligeti’s
sketches (Figure 1.5). On the back of a page from Ligeti’s sketch for Piano Etude no. 17, “À
bout de soufflé” (“Out of Breath”), which he dedicated to Peitgen and which consists of a two-
voice canon, Ligeti doodled a ‘butterfly.’ As will be discussed in Chapter 2, Subsection 2.15,
24
Ian Stewart, Nature’s Numbers: Discovering Order and Pattern in the Universe (London: Weidenfeld
& Nicolson, 1995), 112.
25
The ‘butterfly effect’ was named after Edward Lorenz’s famous paper, “Predictability: Does the flap of
a butterfly’s wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas?” that was presented at the 139th meeting of the
American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington, D.C., 1972. It also refers to the
resulting fractal image from Lorenz’s experiment that resembles a pair of butterfly wings.
26
Peitgen, Jürgens, and Saupe, Chaos and Fractals, 11.
27
György Ligeti, interview by Bálint András Varga, “György Ligeti,” in From Boulanger to Stockhausen:
Interviews and a Memoir, 26-57 (New York: University of Rochester Press, 2013), 39.
9
this is a picture of the Lorenz attractor, which visually represents chaotic processes and
resembles a pair of butterfly wings.
Figure 1.5 Ligeti, sketch of a butterfly28
Peitgen, Jürgens, and Saupe also provided a heuristic example – the kneading of dough as
a metaphor for chaos.29 As part of the metaphor, readers are asked to imagine “work[ing] with
infinitely thin layers of dough.” 30 The process involves a ‘stretch, cut, and paste’ process of
“stretching the dough uniformly to twice its length…[then] cut[ting] the dough at the center into
two parts and past[ing] them on top of each other.”31 The authors elaborated: “There is nothing
random about the kneading process itself. Rather, a baker applies a certain action over and over
again. We imagine kneading as the process of stretching the dough, [cutting and pasting it over],
28
György Ligeti sketch, verso, last page of Reinschrift of Piano Etude no. 17, György Ligeti Collection,
Paul Sacher Foundation, Basel. Found in Brian Lefresne, “Applications of Chaos Theory and Fractal
Geometry in the Music of György Ligeti” (M.A. thesis, University of Ottawa, 2005), 121, plate 5.
29
30
Ibid.
31
Ibid., 498.
10
repeated many times.”32 The action of kneading thus serves as a metaphor for the process of
iteration, in which one repeats the same steps over and over again.
As the authors observed, kneading leads to a destruction of neighborhood relations. In
other words, particles that once were close together might be far apart by the end:
We mark two grains of spice and follow their paths. The two grains are rather
close together initially. But where will they be after a dozen kneadings? It is very
likely that we will find them in very different places in the dough. In fact, that
would be a consequence of the mixing properties of kneading. In other words,
kneading destroys neighborhood relations. Grains which are very close initially
will likely not be close neighbors after a while. This is the effect of sensitive
dependence on initial conditions. Small deviations in initial positions lead to
large deviations in the course of the process.33
32
Ibid., 496.
33
Ibid., 497-8.
11
Musical Context
Ligeti’s Approach to Composition
1.3 Ligeti’s Late Style
The Piano Concerto (1988) belongs to Ligeti’s late style period, which, according to
Richard Steinitz, began after the 1978 premiere of Le Grand Macabre. The period started with a
creative block of approximately seven years, during which the composer wrote only the Horn
Trio (1982). Steinitz attributed the block to Ligeti’s challenge of overcoming a problem “of a
stylistic nature.”34 The composer himself described it as triggered by “a shock to realize that
over the decades, the avant-garde and experimental approach had become obsolescent.”35
As was typical in his creative process, Ligeti sought new inspiration from a variety of
musical and extramusical sources. Of the plethora of inspirational sources, Ligeti singled out
three that were most significant: Sub-Saharan African music, Nancarrow’s player piano works,
and fractal geometry.36 Together, they led to the development of Ligeti’s late style, whose
characteristics include: a new type of complex polyrhythm, experimentation with tuning systems,
and a re-introduction of more traditional uses of melody, ostinato, motives, and counterpoint.
In terms of a new type of rhythm, Ligeti recounted that in the 1980s, he was “preoccupied
with complex rhythms”37 and mentioned influences of Central African polyrhythm and
geometry. His Piano Etudes, Ligeti observed in a 1993 interview, “reflect[ed] a different way of
34
Ligeti, interview by Bálint András Varga, 29.
35
Ligeti, interview with Monika Lichtenfeld, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, 142 (1981): 471-3.
36
“[M]y thinking switched angles, so to speak, partly under outside influences, such as
African music, Nancarrow, and fractal geometry. I believe those three influences brought
about a decisive change, not so much in my basic attitude – that remained the same – but in
my language” (Ligeti, interview by Bálint András Varga, 31).
37
Ibid.
12
thinking and have little in common with romantic and impressionist piano music. That thinking
absorbed influences from various kinds of Sub-Saharan African polyphonic and polyrhythmic
music. I [did] not quote African folklore; rather, I use[d] polyrhythmic complexity as a
compositional method.” 38 He continued: “[My] new kind of rhythm learns from the African
rhythmic system but makes no use of it; instead, it takes the system as a starting point and thinks
in terms of geometry, spaces, and forms…[T]he viola piece I finished during the night is called
Fascar—i.e. wringing something out, creasing a smooth surface, twisting it: this is a topological
idea.”39
In regard to the second late style aspect – alternative tuning systems – the discovery of
Harry Partch’s mathematically-tuned instruments in the 1970s was particularly enlightening. The
composer observed:
The way Partch uses his instruments, all tuned differently is that each produces
perfectly pure sound with natural harmonics but, from the point of view of equal
temperament, they are outrageously out of tune in relation to one another. That is
what interested me, the effect of music where the tuning systems clash; it is like a
body in a state of gradual decomposition.40
In the 1990s, Ligeti likewise observed:
I have been trying for quite some time now to free myself from the twelve-tone
tempered system. I want to write microtonal music, I am feeling the need to
have unlimited sway over intonation. Two instruments, such as a violin and a
viola, properly retuned, produce the fifth overtone (two octaves plus a perfect
major third) and the seventh overtone (two octaves plus a minor—that is, perfect
seventh). In other words, on a small orchestra, I can mix a harmonic spectrum
with perfect overtones. I shall have to do without large orchestras because they
could never do justice to this different intonation…I shall be able to realize the
iridescent harmonic world which I first tried to create in my Violin Concerto. In
that work, I succeeded to a certain extent in freeing myself from the tempered
38
39
Ibid., 46.
40
Steinitz, Music of the Imagination, 193.
13
system. It is far from perfect. In my next compositions, I shall attempt to
progress in that direction.41
Ligeti’s interest in alternative tuning systems led him to experiment with the use of the
natural horn in his Horn Trio, Piano Concerto, and Hamburg Concerto (1999) as well as
scordatura in his Violin Concerto. Though he had similarly experimented with tunings in
middle-period pieces, such as the Double Concerto for Flute, Oboe, and Orchestra (1972), he
took his explorations even further by using the nature of an instrument itself to create out-of-tune
sonorities.
The third aspect of Ligeti’s late style is the re-introduction of more traditional uses of
melody, ostinato, motives, and counterpoint. This is especially true in his Horn Trio, which
opens with an allusion to Beethoven’s ‘Lebewohl’ motif and transforms it to Ligeti’s lamento42
in the last movement. The second movement also makes clear use of both rhythmic and pitch
ostinato, one which the composer re-used in his Piano Etude no. 4, Fanfares (1985).
While Ligeti’s middle-period works, i.e. Atmospheres (1961), Requiem (1965), Chamber
Concerto (1969), Ramifications (1969), were more preoccupied with micropolyphony43 and
large, static textures, his late style balanced textural considerations with other musical elements
41
42
The lamento refers to a stepwise descending melodic line. It pays homage not only to its Renaissance
and Baroque ancestors (such as the lamento-bass of Purcell), but also to memories of the composer’s
childhood in which he remembers the moans of “paid mourners in the houses of those who had died.”
(Steinitz, Music of the Imagination, 254-5.) It also appeared in the Piano Concerto’s second and fourth
movements.
43
“[A] dense canonic structure [where] you cannot actually hear the polyphony, the canon. You hear a
kind of impenetrable texture, something like a very densely woven cobweb…the rules of this polyphony
are worked out by me…it remains hidden in a microscopic, underwater world, to us inaudible.” (György
Ligeti in Composers on Music: Eight Centuries of Writings, 2nd ed., ed. Josiah Fisk and Jeff Nichols
(Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1997): 409.)
14
(rhythm, experimental tunings, melody). Rather than having dense counterpoint to form textural
blocks, the composer interwove leaner, more transparent lines.
1.4 Extramusical Associations
Ligeti’s creative approach can be characterized as rich in association, flexibly
encompassing a variety of old and new, familiar and unfamiliar, and musical and extramusical
elements. This is because Ligeti considered his music “not purist [but rather] contaminated by
an insane number of associations, because [he thought] highly synaesthetically.”44 He explained:
With sounds I always think of forms, with forms of colors and sounds etc., so that
actually a great deal from the visual arts, from literature, but also certain scientific
aspects, things of daily life, political aspects and a great many other things play a
major role for me…I would say a certain level of education is necessary to hear
my music [rather] than if one listens to it without these associations, as pure
music. It is never program music, but is very strongly charged with
associations.45
This resonates with Peitgen’s observation of Ligeti’s “associative way of speaking
[which] often led him from one topic to other very remote reflections,”46 indicating a mind that
found commonalities among dissimilar subjects. Ligeti himself suggested the importance of
commonalities in his comment about a “common denominator:”
The common denominator between Conlon Nancarrow, African

music, fractal geometry and biology: growth from simple to
complex. I have to tell you, I don’t imitate Conlon Nancarrow or
Harry Partch, or the African musicians. This is something else.47
44
Ligeti, in conversation with Klüppelholz, 70, quoted and translated in Floros, Ligeti, 26.
45
Ibid., 28.
46
Peitgen, “A Fractal Friendship,” 87-8.
47
György Ligeti in “A Memorial from Anne LeBaron,” in “American Composers Remember György
Ligeti (1923-2006),” posted by NewMusicBox Staff, New Music Box, July 21, 2006,
http://www.newmusicbox.org/articles/American-Composers-Remember-Gyorgy-Ligeti-19232006/.
15
Similarly, as mentioned by a student who had taken notes during Ligeti’s 1993 visit to
Yale: “Ligeti is extremely enthusiastic about fractals nowadays: during his visit at Yale last
March, he gave a seminar and talked a lot about the use of fractals in his music. Unfortunately,
my notes from that event are somewhat incomplete, because he talked fast and switched from
topic to topic without warning. Otherwise, I would be more specific.”48 Such “common
base[s]”49 or “common denominator[s]”50 from which Ligeti could “[switch] from topic to topic”
were crucial to the composer’s creative thinking.
Ligeti’s compositional process of brainstorming music in connection to various concepts
is evident from his sketches, especially in the category Jonathan Bernard labeled ‘jottings,’51
which generally preceded sketches of graphic or musical notation. In the Piano Concerto
sketches, jottings reveal a wealth of ideas, besides the fractal influence.
[Ligeti’s] notations in the sketches help us realize that in conceiving the work
he incorporated impressions from diverse areas. The stimuli were numerous:
works of occidental art music (especially Liszt, Stravinsky, and Shostakovich),
Conlon Nancarrow and Oscar Peterson, African polyphony, folk music of
Southeastern Europe, dance like the Caribbean salsa and Brazilian samba, and
finally Paul Klee, Paul Cézanne and Constantin Brancusi. What interested him
in Liszt’s Années de pélerinage and his Dante Sonata was the piano technique,
in Stravinsky’s Sacre du printemps the polymetrics, in Shostakovich’s Eighth
Symphony the “cystoscopic” accumulation of dissonances. But the imaginary
ethnological music landscape he had in mind was located somewhere between
Africa, the Balkans, and the Caribbean.52
48
Margaret Mikulska in an online Google Groups posting, October 10, 1993,
https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/rec.music.compose/s26Hqe5JHD0.
49
Peitgen, “A Fractal Friendship,” 95.
50
Ligeti in “A Memorial from Anne LeBaron.”
51
Jonathan Bernard, “Rules and Regulation: Lessons from Ligeti’s Compositional Sketches.” In György
Ligeti: Of Foreign Lands and Strange Sounds, ed. Louise Duchesneau and Wolfgang Marx (Woodbridge:
Boydell & Brewer, 2011), 151.
52
Floros, Ligeti, 180-1.
16
1.5 Visual Stimuli
Besides openly embracing a wide variety of associations via musical analogies, Ligeti
was sensitive to visual stimuli. The composer remarked: “[M]y works abound in images, visual
associations, associations of colors, optical effects and forms.” 53 Visual stimuli included not
only artwork, such as those by Maurits Escher, Paul Cézanne, Hieronymus Bosch, Paul Klee,
and Joan Miró, but also visualizations of scientific and mathematical ideas. Therefore, Ligeti
was most likely impressed not only with the mathematical ideas behind fractals and chaos, but
also their visual representations. Steinitz noted: “The graphic representation of dynamical
systems has underlined the value of sensory perception to our deductive intelligence (we might
note, again, Ligeti’s acknowledged susceptibility to visual stimuli).” 54
The picture puzzles of Escher were particularly inspiring, due to their penchant for
illusion, which aligned with Ligeti’s interests in perceptual experiments. For instance, Steinitz
wrote in 1996: “Ligeti has repeatedly stressed the affinity between his music and Escher’s
enigmatic drawings.”55 Floros likewise affirmed: “[Ligeti] once remarked the Dutch graphic
artist Maurits Cornelis Escher was ‘closest’ to him. Escher’s illusionism, he said, resembled his
own way of working, and his own pleasure in patterns of rhythmic illusion.”56 Regarding
Escher, Ligeti remarked:
Aesthetically, I do not even regard him as great an artist, but in terms of his ideas
and their executions he is akin to me. My way of working with constructions that
yet are not mathematics, with geometric and arithmetic divisions, net, grids – they
53
György Ligeti, György Ligeti in Conversation with Peter Vernai, Josef Häusler, Claude Samuel, and
Himself, trans. Gabor J. Schabert, Sarah E. Soulsby, Terence Kilmartin, and Geoffrey Skelton (London:
Eulenberg Books, 1983), 57-8.
54
Richard Steinitz, “Music, Maths & Chaos,” The Musical Times Vol. 137, no. 1837 (March 1996): 15.
55
Ibid., 13.
56
Floros, Ligeti, 22.
17
resemble his way of working. As he sought the illusion of non-existing
perspectives, so I seek the illusion of not-played rhythmic structures.57
Ligeti’s attraction to optical illusions was also apparent in his fascination with “line patterns of a
turning strobe disk [and thus] planned a piano etude for which he considered titles like
‘Twilight,’ ‘Claire-obscure,’ ‘Irisation,’ and, in fact, ‘Moiré.’ ”58
Not only was Ligeti inspired by images, but the composer’s creative process involved
sketching visual projections of his music before determining any details in music notation.
Indeed, Bernard’s second category of sketches after jottings is ‘drawings’ that portray Ligeti’s
musical planning in visual form. Bernard also noted: “Even more revealing is a comment
[Ligeti] made on one occasion about his compositional process: that after first imagining a new
work from beginning to end (‘ten times, perhaps 100 times’), ‘the next step is always to have a
drawing – no notes. I am never writing directly scores…They are very similar to what is called
graphic notation,’ which he then noted that he had carried directly over to the form of the
published score in Volumina, a work for organ dating from 1961-2.”59
1.6 Ligeti’s ‘Intuitive’ Composing Process?
Ligeti professed to compose intuitively, detesting any type of “systems,” 60 whether
political, mathematical, or musical, and was quick to dismiss music written only on theory,
57
György Ligeti, Das Orchester 36 (1988): 889, quoted and translated in Floros, Ligeti, 109.
58
Floros, Ligeti, 22.
59
György Ligeti, “Ligeti Talks to Adrian Jack,” Music and Musicians 22/11 (1974), 24-30, quoted in
Bernard, “Rules and Regulations,” 154.
60
Manfred Stahnke, “The Hamburg Composition Class,” in György Ligeti: Of Foreign Lands and
Strange Sounds, ed. Louise Duchesneau and Wolfgang Marx (Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer, 2011),
228.
18
whose “sounding image was meaningless.”61 Ligeti called his composing process “random” in
an interview with Bálint András Varga, using the metaphor of a “cauldron permanently on the
boil:”
GL: In writing a score, no conscious thinking is involved.
BAV: But it is all there in what you call gesture. Everything becomes part
of it.
GL: It becomes part of a receptacle without my having a notion of its

content. I draw from it without meaning to.
BA: In another interview…you talked about a cauldron permanently on the

boil. Various ingredients are added to the material in it which lend it
different flavors: a graphic image of personality nurturing creation.
GL: The collecting of ingredients happens at random.
BAV: Why do you stress the unintentional aspect?
GL: Because it is wrong to assume that I consciously look for influences in

science or the fine arts which I then apply in composition. It all happens
randomly.
…
BAV: It is interesting that you should be laying so much stress on
spontaneity or chance. After all, your approach to music can be highly
conscious – the way you analyze your own music or pieces by others…It
appears that a conscious approach exists side by side in you with a
carefully guarded spontaneity.
GL: This kind of thinking is mainly subconscious. In composing, I

imagine music in a wholly naïve manner. With hindsight, I realize here and
there I employed such and such a construction. 62
Although claiming complete intuition in his interview with Bálint András Varga, Ligeti
did use conscious organizational techniques while composing. In the Piano Concerto’s fourth
movement, Ligeti relied on both 12-tone and talea-like procedures. Ligeti’s awareness of 12-
61
Manfred Stahnke, “The Hamburg Composition Class,” 228.
62
Ligeti, interview by Bálint András Varga, 34-35.
19
tone techniques is evident from a 1980 sketch (Example 1.1), which includes the 12-tone series
used in fourth movement as well as 12 pentachordal combinations derived from this series (at the
very bottom of the sketch).
Example 1.1 The 12-tone series C# , D# , F# , G, E, C, B, A, G# , D, F, Bb

and pentachordal combinations in a 1980 Piano Concerto sketch63 (circled)
Similarly, the composer’s conscious use of Medieval talea64 techniques is acknowledged
in conversation with Floros, on the subject of the first movement:
63
György Ligeti, Piano Concerto sketch, György Ligeti Collection, Paul Sacher Foundation, Basel.
Found in Steinitz, “Genesis of the Piano Concerto and the Horn Trio,” color plate 10.
20
Ligeti referred to the talea concept of late medieval music. Both the piano part
and the string part at the beginning of the Concerto, he explained, are based on
firm, recurrent rhythmic periods that are divided asymmetrically. The period of
the piano part (noted in 12/8 time) measures 2.5 bars and consists of 30 pulses
divided into groups of 11, 13, and 6 units. The period of the strings playing
pizzicato (notated in 4/4 time), on the other hand, comprises 3 measures and
consists of 24 pulses grouped in units of 13 and 11 pulses. The simultaneity of
the periods of different length and different rhythmic patterns results in a tricky
polyrhythm. 65
1.7 Mathematics and Science in Ligeti’s Composing Process?
Ligeti also denied the use of calculation and algorithms in his composing process. He
was careful to point out the differences between music, science, and math: “Scientific ideas and
methods differ so fundamentally from artistic ones that neither technology nor mathematics by
themselves would be able to produce any art…Scientific facts, however, can well fertilize artistic
ideas and conceptions and thereby beneficially affect the development of a new visual art and a
new music.”66 Likewise, during a 1993 public discussion with Steinitz, Ligeti observed:
“Somewhere underneath, very deeply, there’s a common place in our spirit where the beauty of
mathematics and the beauty of music meet. But they don’t meet on the level of algorithm or
making music by calculation. It’s much lower, much deeper – or much higher, you could say.”67
64
In his 1988 notes on the Piano Concerto, Ligeti used the word ‘Talea’’ in reference only to a
reoccurring rhythmic pattern, rather than the traditional meaning of the word. In essence, there is no
pitch-rhythmic alignment. Only the rhythmic element can be determined as a constant pattern.
65
66
György Ligeti, “Meine Stellung als Komponist heute,” Gesammelte Schriften, ed. Monika Lichtenfeld,
2 vol. (New York, 2002), 2:114 f, quoted and translated in Floros, Ligeti, 23.
67
György Ligeti, public conversation with Richard Steinitz, 1993, Huddersfield, quoted in Steinitz,
“Music, maths, & chaos,” 14.
21
Regarding the fractal influence, Ligeti described it as “poetic”68 with fractals “provid[ing]
exactly what [he] want[ed] to discover in [his] own music, a kind of organic development.”69
The following year in an interview with Musical America, Ligeti again affirmed:
Yes, fractals are what I want to find in my music. They are the most complex of
ornaments in the arts, like small sea horses, like the Alhambra where the walls are
decorated with geometric ornaments of great minuteness and intricacy, or like the
Irish Book of Kells, those marvelously decorated borders and capitals. The most
complicated ornaments—perhaps not art, perhaps geometry. It is a very complex
music, difficult to describe. 70
Similarly, in reference to the Piano Concerto’s fourth movement, Ligeti stated that he
“work[ed] by construction,” with his “relationship to mathematics” as similar to Maurits Escher,
involving “intuitive, poetic, synaesthetic correspondences.”71 Instead, as asserted by Steinitz,
Ligeti preferred creating “musical analogies to fractal images without a computer and without
mathematics.”72 Steinitz described these as “perceptual rather than algebraic analog[ies].”73
Such “musical analogies” can be found during Ligeti’s 1999 interview with the
Discovery Channel in which he explained how the fractal concept might be applied to various
parameters:
Fractals are patterns which occur on many levels. This concept can applied to any
musical parameter. I make melodic fractals, where the pitches of a theme I dream
up are used to determine a melodic shape on several levels, in space and time. I
make rhythmic fractals, where a set of durations associated with a motive get
68
György Ligeti, interview by John Rockwell, “Laurels at an Auspicious Time for György Ligeti,” New
York Times, November 11, 1986, http://www.nytimes.com/1986/11/11/arts/laurels-at-an-auspicious-time-
for-gyorgy-ligeti.html.
69
Ibid.
70
György Ligeti, interview by Dorle J. Soria, “György Ligeti: Distinguished and Unpredictable,” Musical
America 107, No. 4, September 1987, posted by Josh Ronsen on February 2003,
http://ronsen.org/monkminkpinkpunk/9/gl5.html.
71
Ligeti, “On My Piano Concerto,” 12.
72
Floros, Ligeti, 143.
73
Richard Steinitz, “Weeping and Wailing,” The Musical Times Vol. 137, No. 1842
(August 1996): 22.
22
stretched and compressed and maybe layered on top of each other. I make
loudness fractals, where the characteristic loudness of a sound, its envelope shape,
is found on several time scales. I even make fractals with the form of a piece, its
instrumentation, density, range, and so on. Here I've separated the parameters of
music, but in a real piece, all of these things are combined, so you might call it a
fractal of fractals.74
Although this does not mean that in the Piano Concerto’s fourth movement, Ligeti incorporated
every type of musical ‘fractal’ in the manner described above, it is useful to know how the
composer musically analogized the ‘fractal’ idea. In Part II, musical-mathematical connections
will be explored further in an analysis of the fourth movement.
1.8 Ligeti’s Fondness for Numerical Sequences
Likewise, Ligeti enjoyed numerical sequences. Steinitz wrote of Ligeti’s “love of
numerical patterns [being] revived by Douglas Hofstadter’s book Gödel, Escher, Bach”75 in
connection to a 1985-6 sketch76 of the Piano Concerto (Example 1.2), in which Ligeti wrote a
series of numbers above six phrases “5, 6, 7, 8, 7 and 6” to indicate the number of notes (not
including immediate repetitions) within each preceding phrase. The sequence “5, 6, 7, 8, 7 and
6” also suggests expansion and contraction with increasing and decreasing consecutive order.
74
György Ligeti, interview with the Discovery Channel, 1999, quoted in Benoît Mandelbrot and Richard
Hudson, The (Mis)Behaviour of Markets: A Fractal View of Financial Turbulence (New York: Basic
Books, 2004), 133.
75
Richard Steinitz, “À qui un hommage? Genesis of the Piano Concerto and the Horn Trio,” in György
Ligeti: Of Foreign Lands and Strange Sounds, ed. Louise Duchesneau and Wolfgang Marx (Woodbridge:
Boydell & Brewer,
2011), 205.
76
Ibid.
23
5 à C, B, C, D, C#
6 à Eb , D, C# , B, (B), C, Bb
7 à C# , D, C#, E, Eb , D, C
8 à E, Eb , D, Eb , Db , C, F, Eb
7 à D, Db , C, Db , Bb , C, B
6 à Bb , Cb , Bb , C, B, A
Example 1.2 Ligeti, Piano Concerto 1985-6 sketch with numerical patterns77 (highlighted)
77
Found in Steinitz, “Genesis of the Piano Concerto and the Horn Trio,” 206, figure 11.
24
Steinitz also noted the importance of “numerical relationships [to Ligeti] giving ‘solidity’
to a structure.” 78 He referred to a statement the composer made in 1990: “ ‘It matters a great deal
to me that the joints are tight, the cogwheels revolve smoothly and the construction is stable.’ ”79
Similarly, Steinitz remarked that in 1983, when the composer returned to composing the Piano
Concerto, “he had tried many polymetric and mathematical constructs. None had provided an
adequate foundation.”80
Ligeti’s emphasis on “numerical patterns” giving a “ ‘solidity’ to a structure” already had
its traces in the first movement of Apparitions (1959) whose sketch (Figure 1.6) reveals the
incorporation of the Fibonacci sequence, in which “[e]ach number…is just the sum of its two
predecessors.”81 The first several numbers of this sequence are: 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55,
89, 144, 233…
78
Steinitz, “Genesis of the Piano Concerto and the Horn Trio,” 209. Note that other composers, such as
Charles Wuorinen and Marc Neikrug, have similarly incorporated durational proportions to shape
sections of music.
79
György Ligeti, interview by Tünde Szitha, “A Conversation with György Ligeti,” Hungarian Music
Quarterly 3/1 (1992), quoted in Steinitz, “Genesis of the Piano Concerto and the Horn Trio,” 209.
80
Steinitz, “Genesis of the Piano Concerto and the Horn Trio,” 209.
81
25
Figure 1.6 Ligeti, Apparitions sketch82
The Fibonacci sequence is also significant in its relation to the golden mean. As in Table
1.1, ratios between adjacent Fibonacci numbers converge toward the golden mean, which
(rounded to 9 decimals) is 1.618033988.
Table 1.1 Ratios of adjacent Fibonacci numbers (rounded to 6 decimals)
Adjacent Fibonacci Numbers Ratios as Decimals

1/1 1.0
2/1 2.0
3/2 1.5
5/3 1.666666
8/5 1.6
13/8 1.625
82
György Ligeti, Apparitions sketch, György Ligeti Collection, Paul Sacher Foundation, Basel. Found in
Floros, Ligeti, 82, facsimile 6.
26
21/13 1.615385
34/21 1.619048
55/34 1.617647
89/55 1.618182
144/89 1.617978
233/144 1.618056
We do know that Ligeti took an interest in Lendvai’s83 work in connection to Bartòk.
Floros wrote: “When Ligeti conceived this movement, he was still under the impression of the
theories of Ernö Lendvais, who sought to demonstrate the golden section in the works of Béla
Bartòk.”84 Discoveries of the Fibonacci series have also been made in regard to other composers
Ligeti would have known, i.e. Stockhausen,85 Nono, 86 and Nancarrow,87 as well as in other
Ligeti compositions besides Apparations, such as Glissandi88 and Magyar Etüdök.89
In connection to Ligeti’s ‘incorporation’ of the golden mean and Fibonacci series,
Richard Toop argued that “the exactness of the analogy is of secondary interest: what the
scientific model offers here is inspiration, not legitimation.”90 Likewise, Gabriel Pareyon in his
83
Ernő Lendvai, “Einführung in die Formen- und Harmonienwelt Bartóks (1953),” in Weg und Werk,
Schriften und Briefe, ed. Bence Szabolcsi (Budapest: Corvina, 1957), 91-137.
84
Floros, Ligeti, 82.
85
See Jonathan Kramer, “The Fibonacci Series in Twentieth-Century Music,” Journal of Music Theory,
Vol. 17, No. 1 (Spring, 1973): 121-126.
86
Ibid.
87
See Kyle Gann, The Music of Conlon Nancarrow: Music in the Twentieth Century, ed. Arnold Whittall
(New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 259-260.
88
See Benjamin Levy, “The Electronic Works of György Ligeti and Their Influence on His Later Style”
(Ph.D. diss., University of Maryland, 2006), 48.
89
See Luminita Aluas, “Visible and Audible Structures: Spatio-Temporal Compromise in Ligeti’s
‘Magyar Etüdök,’ ” Tempo, New Series, No. 183 (Dec. 1992): 7-17.
90
Richard Toop, György Ligeti (London: Phaidon Press, 1999), 201.
27
2011 dissertation “On Musical Self-Similarity” pointed out that although not mathematically
exact, the composer often “ma[de] a discretionary use of proportions and symmetry:” 91
[A]s the musicologist Gionmario Borio later pointed out to [Ligeti], [the
composer] made so many small adjustments in the process of composition that
hardly a single Fibonacci number was left. Be that as it may, ever since
Apparitions, analysts have hastened to find golden sections and Fibonacci
proportions…in Ligeti’s work. They may even be there, says Ligeti, but not by
design: he used this particular kind of conscious numerical structuring once, and
only once.92
1.9 Ligeti’s Thoughts on Mathematical ‘Findings’ in Analysis of His Music
Ligeti’s conversation with Gionmario Borio regarding the Fibonacci numbers suggests
that the composer did not mind mathematical ‘findings’ in analysis, instead saying “they may
even be there.” 93 However, Ligeti also cautioned against “find[ing]…that which one might call
the ‘scientific’ [or] the ‘mathematical”94 in his Piano Etudes, works which were partly inspired
by fractal geometry. At the same time, Ligeti’s own musical analysis of works by Mozart and
himself reveals an understanding that the composer’s awareness is ultimately irrelevant in
analysis of the work.
As far as analysis is concerned…I examined thoroughly one of my favorite pages

of Mozart, the slow introduction to the first movement of the C-Major String
Quartet K. 465, dedicated to Haydn…I took a close look at this section—
absolutely mad with its cross-relations and Neapolitan sixths…I wrote my
analysis, but was absolutely certain that Mozart’s thinking did not work that way.
Rather, [Mozart] was aware of the contemporary technique, a chromatic tradition
inherited from Monteverdi through Buxtehude and Bach. Mozart did not mull over
the way he would be making a big modulatory detour through the subdominant of
91
Gabriel Pareyon, “On Musical Self-Similarity: Intersemiosis as Synecdoche and Analogy” (Ph.D. diss.,
University of Helsinki, 2011), 463.
92
Pareyon, “On Musical Self-Similarity,” 463, referring to Gionmario Borio, Musikalische Avantgarde
um 1960: Entwurf einer Theorie der informellen Musik (Laaber: Laaber-Verlag, 1993).
93
Ibid.
94
György Ligeti, “On My Etudes for Piano,” trans. Sid McLauchlan (Sonus 9/1, 1988): 4.
28
the subdominant’s subdominant or that he would use the dominant of the dominant
as a means of maintaining tension; he simply wrote what he did. Mozart of course
is a quite exceptional example. My own far more modest working method is
similar.
Over the past three days, I composed a viola piece [Fascar]…Fascar is my second
work for viola solo and while composing it I had no idea what I was doing. During
the night when I was making a fair copy of the score, I realized what sort of
structure the piece has, that this is actually a ten-bar sentence repeated again and
again in variation. But while writing it, I was unaware of this.95
95
Ligeti, interview by Bálint András Varga, 37-38.
29
Ligeti’s Relation to Mathematics
1.10 Ligeti’s Background in Science and Mathematics
Ligeti had a strong foundation in and understanding of mathematics. As a youth, science
was his primary career choice. Part of this, according to Steinitz, can be attributed to Ligeti’s
father, who had a “scientific bent” and who believed Ligeti should “not waste time learning an
instrument” and instead “pursue the scientific career [the father] had been denied.”96 Ligeti, too,
demonstrated an early interest in science and mathematics. In his early teens, Ligeti “obtained a
university textbook on inorganic chemistry and, in a drawer originally reserved for toys, set up a
tiny ‘laboratory.’ ”97 The composer also took an interest in geography and conceived of a
fantastical world called Kilviria of which he took particular care in mapping its topology.
Despite passing the entrance exams for physics and mathematics at the University of Kolozsvár
in 1941, he was denied admission due to stringent regulations that only one Jew could be
accepted per year.98
In the 1980s and 1990s, Ligeti’s interest in mathematics was rekindled, and he studied
fractal geometry and its related phenomenon, chaos, for over ten years.99 Among the
mathematical books Ligeti mentioned reading are Peitgen and Richter’s The Beauty of Fractals
(1986), Mandelbrot’s The Fractal Geometry of Nature (1982), Hofstadter’s Gödel, Escher,
Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid (1979) and its sequel Metamagical Themas: Questing for the
Essence of Mind and Pattern (1985), as well as Courant and Robbins’ What is Mathematics?
96
97
Ibid., 10.
98
Ibid., 17.
99
30
(1993). Lastly, Ligeti actively sought friendships with mathematicians Heinz-Otto Peitgen and
Benoît Mandelbrot.
1.11 Ligeti’s “Pre-fractal” vs. “Fractal” Thinking
Although Ligeti did not resume an in-depth study mathematics or science until the 1980s
(the beginning of his late style period), traces of his scientific thinking can be found in his earlier
music. For example, in a 1969 interview, Ligeti reflected upon his music of the later 1950s,
recalling that “two opposite formal types or ‘types of motion’ were characteristic. In the static
forms, for which he had a predilection, music could not be perceived as a process but became a
state. The second, contrasting type, on the other hand, was characterized by being completely
chopped and splintered. He cited Atmospheres as an example of the first type and the ‘Dies Irae’
(also Aventures and Nouvelles Aventures) as illustrating the second. From these two types of
motion, he continued, he had, in the last few years, been moving onto other types, ‘which are
neither total arrest nor completely abrupt change.’ ”100
Moreover, in a discussion of his Requiem (1965), Ligeti described the Kyrie as his “pre-
fractal, unconscious kind of fractal (in voice-leading, structure, and texture) in which everything
is not quite the same, but it is similar.”101 The Kyrie (Example 1.3) is famous for Ligeti’s use of
‘micropolyphony,’ which the composer described as a “dense canonic structure.”102
100
György Ligeti, interview by Josef Häusler, Southwest Radio Baden-Baden, December 14, 1969,
quoted and translated in Floros, Ligeti, 40.
101
102
Josiah Fisk and Jeff Nichols, Composers on Music: Eight Centuries of Writings, 409.
31
Example 1.3 Micropolyphony as a characteristic device in Ligeti’s middle period (Requiem,
Kyrie, mm. 1-6). The oscillating contour and shared pitches Bb, A, B, G#, and A of Subjects 1
and 2 create the impression of similar shapes unfolding at different times.
In Example 1.3, there is a double canon, with the Subject 1 starting with Bb, A, Bb, A, Bb,
Cb , Bb in Altos 1-4 and Subject 2 on Bb, A, B, G# , B, A in Tenors 1-4. Both subjects are similar
in their oscillating contour and intervallic motion and can be interpreted as variations of each
other. Subject 1 seems to outline pitches of Subject 2 (highlighted in dotted green lines). Subject
1 shares Subject 2’s first two pitches Bb and A (Alto 1, m. 1), before emphasizing Subject 2’s
third note Cb with a longer duration (Alto 1, m. 2). Subject 1’s eighth notes (Alto 1, mm. 3-4)
also hover around G# and B, Subject 2’s fourth and fifth notes. Subject 1 then settles on A (Alto
32
1, m. 4), Subject 2’s sixth note. Additionally, while statements of both subjects are rhythmically
altered, the second subject can be understood as a slower variation of the first.
As Subject 1 and Subject 2 appear to outline similar shapes, yet at different speeds, we
might connect this to the fractal property of self-similarity at multiple scales. The act of layering
the same strands of pitches, with slight variations in the rhythm, is also similar to the process of
iteration. Both involve repetition of similar shapes at different scales, which leads to increasing
complexity and, as in the Koch snowflake, Sierpinski Triangle, and Mandelbrot set, a filling in of
space. Additionally, the attention to the miniscule, as suggested by the term ‘micropolyphony,’
has its parallels with the focus on the small in fractals (with self-similarity replicating on a
diminishing scale) and chaos (in connection to the butterfly effect, where tiny changes
accumulate into drastic ones).
Technically, to make a closer fractal analogy, subsequent imitations of the subject should
be faster and faster, as a way of musically expressing smaller and smaller scales. Instead,
because the faster subject is presented first, we have the impression of the same shape unfolding
more slowly in the second subject. In the fourth movement of the Piano Concerto, as we will
see, Ligeti did express melodic shapes with decreasing note values as the piece progresses from
beginning to end. Example 1.4 shows excerpts from the fourth movement to give a superficial
understanding of this focus on increasingly tinier scales. Moreover, in conversation with
Hungarian musicologist Tünde Szitha, Ligeti described the fourth movement as incorporating a
“certain geometric vortex” whereby “the ever-decreasing rhythmical values produce the
33
sensation of a kind of acceleration.”103 This marks a difference between Ligeti’s “pre-fractal”
thinking compared to his later “fractal” intent and suggests the possibility that Ligeti’s earlier
‘micropolyphony’ might have merged with his later “fractal” thinking.
Example 1.4 Ligeti, Piano Concerto, fourth movement, showing increasing density
a. Beginning with low level density (mm. 1-4)
103
Ligeti, interview by Tünde Szitha, “A Conversation with György Ligeti,” 16.
34
b. Middle with medium level density (mm. 65-68)
35
c. Ending with high level density (mm. 137-140)
36
1.12 Ligeti’s “Pre-Chaotic” vs. “Chaotic” Thinking
Ligeti was similarly predisposed toward the juxtaposition of order and disorder as well as
determinism and indeterminism before his discovery of chaos. Indeed, his preoccupation with
the irreversible transformations resembling the butterfly effect can be traced back to a childhood
dream. Below is a description of the composer’s grotesque nightmare:
In my early childhood I once dreamt that I could not make my way to my little
bed …because the whole room was filled with a finely spun but dense and
extremely tangled web…Besides myself, other living creatures and objects were
caught in this immense web: moths and beetles of all sorts, which were trying to
get to the weakly flickering candle in the room...Every movement of an
immobilized insect caused the entire web to start shaking so that the big, heavy
pillows swung back and forth; this, in turn, made everything rock even more.
Sometimes the reciprocal movements became so violent that the web tore in
places and a few beetles were unexpectedly liberated, only to be ensnared soon
thereafter, with a choked buzz, in the rocking mesh once again. These periodic,
suddenly occurring events gradually altered the internal structure of the web,
which became ever more tangled. In places impenetrable knots formed; in others,
caverns opened up where shreds of the original web were floating about like
gossamer. These transformations were irreversible; no earlier state could ever
recur. There was something inexpressibly sad about this process: the
hopelessness of elapsing time and of the irretrievable past.104
Although the dream described Ligeti’s arachnophobia, it had a “definite influence”105 on
the compositions of his middle-period style (late 1950s, early 1960s), in particular Apparations
(final version 1958-9). Such works contained an “irreversible transformation[al]” quality that
continued to be present in Ligeti’s later compositions, such as Désordre, which Ligeti considered
a “concealed homage to the new science of deterministic chaos.” 106 This nightmare revealed
that from a very young age, the composer was aware, at least subconsciously, of the possibilities
of transformation through minute changes.
104
György Ligeti, “States, Events, Transformations,” trans. Jonathan Bernard, Perspectives of New Music
Vol. 31, No. 1 (Winter 1993): 164-5.
105
Ibid.
106
Ligeti, “Polyrhythmik in den Klavieretüden” lecture, 89.
37
Another childhood memory of the composer shows connections to the clock-like,
mechanical sounds found in what Ligeti referred to as his “meccanico-type music,”107 such as in
his Poème Symphonique (1962), Continuum (1968), the third movement of his String Quartet no.
2 (1968), and the third movement of his Chamber Concerto (1969). While the topic of this
dissertation is not his “meccanico-type music,” the memory is relevant because it depicted
Ligeti’s fascination with order and disorder. In Ligeti’s childhood memory, clocks (or
machinery) that did not work represented disorder:
I must have been about five when I came on a volume of [Gyula]

Krudy’s short stories, which was a book quite unsuitable for
children… One of the stories was about the widow living in a
house full of clocks ticking away all the time. The meccanico-type
music really originates from reading that story on a hot summer
afternoon. Afterwards, other everyday experiences came to be
added to the memory of the house full of ticking clocks; images of
buttons we push and a machine would start working or
not…Recalcitrant machinery, unmanageable automata have always
fascinated me.108
One can see parallels with Ligeti’s later fascination with Sub-Saharan African
polyrhythm and polyphony, also related to the idea of chaos and order. In the Preface to Arom’s
African Polyphony and Polyrhythm, Ligeti described the “proximity...between [African music]
and [his] own way of thinking with regards to composition: that is, the creation of structures
which are both remarkably simple and highly complex…[T]he patterns performed by the
individual musicians are quite different from those which result from their combination…[T]he
ensemble’s super-pattern is in itself not played and exists only as an illusory outline…What we
107
Ligeti, “States, Events, Transformations,” 164.
108
Jane Clendinning, “Pattern-Meccanico Compositions of György Ligeti,” Perspectives of New Music
31/1 (Winter 1993): 193.
38
can witness in this music is a wonderful combination of order and disorder which in turn merges
together producing a sense of order at a higher level.”109
Additionally, Ligeti’s work Clocks and Clouds (1972) was inspired by an essay bearing
the same title by Karl Popper. Popper’s paper compared the “exactly measurable processes
(clocks)” with “indeterminate ones describable only statistically (clouds).”110 Moreover, Ligeti
discussed visually the structural processes “in which rhythmically and harmonically precise
shapes gradually merge into diffuse tonal textures and vice versa, and overlappings occur
besides, so that ‘clocks’ tick within ‘clouds’ and ‘clouds’, as it were, hollow out and liquefy
‘clocks’ from within.”111
Similarly, mathematician Heinz-Otto Peitgen in his 2011 article posthumously
celebrating his friendship with Ligeti cited the composer’s Poème Symphonique for 100
metronomes (1962) and Continuum (1968) for their “experimental and scientific character.”112
Peitgen wrote:
While composing the Poème Symphonique Ligeti had in mind numerous

superimposed grids, moiré patterns, which would result in changing structures. He
wanted to produce a rhythmic grid that is so thick at the beginning that it seemed
practically continuous. Irregular grid structures, which emerge one after the other
as the metronomes stop ticking, gradually replace this disordered but
homogeneous blur. In this way, unpredictable patterns grow out of the uniformity
of the opening. At the end we have a single metronome left ticking and the
uniformity of the beginning is re-established.
After composing Poème Symphonique Ligeti applied the same clockwork-like

rhythmic process to various other pieces, the most characteristic of which is the
harpsichord piece Continuum…What we don’t realize is that Ligeti is putting his
listeners through a perceptual experiment. If we read the instructions in the score,
109
György Ligeti, in his Preface to Simha Arom, African Polyphony and Polyrhythm, trans. Raymond
Boyd, Martin Thom, and Barbara Tuckett (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), xvii.
110
Floros, Ligeti, 40.
111
György Ligeti, Melos 41 (1974), 42, quoted and translated in Floros, Ligeti, 41.
112
39
it is immediately clear that he is interested in creating an effect, not just in stating
ordinary tempo indications:
“Prestissimo = extremely fast, so that the individual tones can hardly be perceived,
but rather merge into a continuum. Play very evenly, without articulation of any
sort. The correct tempo has been reached when the piece lasts less than 4 minutes
(not counting the long fermata at the end). The vertical broken lines are not bar
lines – there is neither beat nor meter in this piece – but serve merely as a means
of orientation.”113
Peitgen implied that Ligeti was already experimenting with “illusionary patterns” in the
1960s. This is, of course, the essence of polyrhythm, and Ligeti himself confirmed he was
already experimenting with rhythmic illusions: “I found patterns of rhythmic illusion long before
I ever knew Escher – already in my piece for a hundred metronomes or in Continuum.”114
Peitgen also argued that Ligeti wrote Poème Symphonique and Continuum with the curiosity of a
scientist conducting a perceptual experiment. Furthermore, with Continuum (Example 1.5),
Peitgen linked the music with chaos as well as the rhythmic techniques used in Ligeti’s first
Piano Etude, Désordre:
In the right hand we hear a repeated two-note motive, Bb-G, and in the left hand
the same motive but inverted, G-Bb…After nine periods, Ligeti adds an F to the
right hand, thus creating a three-note motive, Bb-G-F, while the two-note
motive continues in the left hand. This tiny change leads to a rhythmic
complexity which can be called ‘virtual,’ that is, nothing has been changed
rhythmically – we still have evenly placed quavers although we hear uneven
rhythmics. A trace of chaos: small variations lead to big effects. One could say
that Ligeti has built in a butterfly. The beginning of the piece is completely
uniform. But as soon as you add a third note in one hand, here an F, it will stick
out and sound as if it were held while the other two are just blurred. The
rhythmic patterns which are produced by the interplay between the two hands
are musical figures of a ‘second order,’ that is, they are not directly produced
by the player but are illusionary patterns which are produced by overlapping
grids of different speeds. One finds many examples of Ligeti using similar
procedures, for instance in the first Étude for Piano, Désordre (1985).115
113
Ibid., 91-92.
114
György Ligeti, Das Orchester 36 (1988): 889, quoted and translated in Floros, Ligeti, 109.
115
40
Example 1.5 Polyrhythm (Peitgen’s “illusionary patterns”) in Ligeti’s Continuum (mm. 1-12)
While we may consider Continuum a ‘pre-chaotic’ work, Désordre is Ligeti’s
deliberately ‘chaotic’ work. As Steinitz noted, the main procedure in Désordre involved (1) the
juxtaposition of different, though repeating, cycles in the R.H. and L.H. and (2) the R.H.’s
simple recursive process of omitting an eighth-note every four bars as well as the L.H.’s later
process of adding of an eighth-note every three bars. The R.H. and L.H. cycles span 14
measures and 20 measures in length, respectively. Steinitz observed: “Any remaining stability is
upset [by an] apparently small discrepancy whose effect is to turn...hemiolas into a headlong
stampede of incessant accents.”116
Moreover, we can see a “fractal” result from the chaotic process of Désordre by
comparing the first 7 accented notes of the R.H. (Example 1.6) with the peaks of phrases in the
R.H.’s first cycle (Example 1.7). In Example 1.7, the peaks of phrases are highlighted in yellow.
116
Steinitz, “The Dynamics of Disorder,” 8.
41
Each phrase is numbered in violet, and the R.H.’s process of omitting an eighth-note every four
bars is indicated in blue.
Example 1.6 Ligeti, Désordre, first 7 accented notes and peaks of phrases in the R.H.
Example 1.7 Ligeti, Désordre, peaks of phrases in the R.H.’s first cycle
42
Thus, one can deduce that Ligeti’s attraction to fractals and chaos resonated not only with
his early scientific interests but also with musical processes the composer was already
implementing. This suggests that Ligeti chose extramusical sources of inspiration that
analogously supported previous compositional inclinations while providing new perspectives for
his current musical thinking. For example, with regard to another significant extramusical
influence in his late style, Central African polyrhythm and polyphony, Ligeti commented:
I found this useful to reinforce my ideas. It is the possibility to have three

rhythmical levels. I don't really use bars. I write bars, for the musicians,
because they have to be together. It is difficult when you have different
speeds at the same time…In my Piano Concerto I developed this
polyphony to much higher complexity.117
Perhaps this is why Ligeti professed to “more or less intuit what mathematics is all about
as well as about the way mathematicians think”118 and related mathematical thinking to his
compositional approach:
Although I am an artist, my working method is that of a scientist active in basic

research rather than applied science. Or of a mathematician working on a new
mathematical structure, or of a physicist looking for the tiniest particle of the
atomic nucleus…I am driven by curiosity to discover reality. Of course, there is
no reality in art the way there is in science, but the working method is similar.
Exactly as in basic research where the solution of a problem throws up
innumerable new ones, the completion of a composition raises a host of new
questions to be answered in the next piece.119
117
Ligeti, interview by Dorle J. Soria, “György Ligeti: Distinguished and Unpredictable.”
118
119
Ibid., 33.
43
1.13 Friendships with Heinz-Otto Peitgen and Benoît Mandelbrot
Ligeti met Peitgen in 1985 and Mandelbrot in 1986, leading to mutually-inspiring
friendships and professional collaborations. Ligeti worked with Peitgen on a series of lectures.
He also collaborated with Mandelbrot during a conference in Bad Neuenahr, presenting
Désordre “for mathematicians.”120 In 1996, Ligeti and Mandelbrot played important roles as
speakers for the Festival Archipel in Geneva and Grama/Musiques en Scène of Lyons which
featured the topics ‘Fractals and Music’ as well as ‘Music and Mathematics.’121
Peitgen’s respect and fondness for Ligeti are evident in his writings about the composer:
I knew Ligeti as a probing inquirer…It is not necessary to know that mathematics

– especially chaos and fractals, and other sciences, particularly the psychology of
perception – fascinated him in order to fall under the spell of his music. However
both were for him more than a stimulus. He felt like someone who, through his
work, participated and contributed in his own way to these exciting fields, and I
think he succeeded in an inimitable way.122
In the same article, Peitgen wrote: “Those who had the pleasure of meeting him might find my
account uninteresting and dull because his brilliant manner, his piercing questions, as well as his
caustic criticism – in appearance always deceptively mild – can hardly be put in words.”123
Among Peitgen’s accounts of Ligeti are references to the composer’s intellectual curiosity,
which impressed the mathematician: “[Ligeti] followed the advancement of brain research with
great interest and extraordinary insight, and there is no doubt that his enthusiasm for current
scientific advances was the unifying inspiration behind his creative work.” 124
Reflecting upon his correspondences with Ligeti, Peitgen noted:
120
121
Ibid.
122
123
Ibid., 87.
124
Ibid., 93.
44
His letters have anticipated the new email style: postcards or simple white sheets of
paper without heading, often every square centimeter used [economical]. No
introduction, no formal ending, just a few highly condensed thoughts, extremely
efficient and focused. No waste of time and energy on unimportant ornaments or
accessories: pure communication.
Our discussions are debates, which flow unrestricted, becoming journeys of

discovery that demand the highest level of concentration. No mental leap is too
daring – and questions, questions, questions…Infinite curiosity, supported by the
most rigorous intellectual yet unconventional observation.125
Peitgen also described his interactions with the composer: “Our many conversations helped
Ligeti to work out for himself these dimensions [of mathematics] in great depth and his
fascination was comparable to that of those who had first made discoveries in the 20th
century.”126 Peitgen similarly admired the composer’s flexible thinking: “[Ligeti’s] associative
way of speaking often led him from one topic to other very remote reflections.”127 Lastly and
most revealingly, Peitgen wrote about ‘the Maelstrom’ fractal128 in connection to the Piano
Concerto’s fourth movement:
[W]hat we see here is a [fractal] image whose complexity and also appealing
beauty is unequalled, and still the process which engendered it could not be
simpler. Ligeti also understood this, he always asked probing questions and dared
to venture towards the most difficult mathematical heights. He also called the
picture I had dedicated toward him ‘the Maelstrom.’ It inspired him to musical
processes which played a fundamental role in the composition of the fourth
movement of the Piano Concerto.129
125
Heinz-Otto Peitgen in The Journal no. 3 (Schott, May/June1998), 1-2, http://www.schott-
music.com/cms/resources/_smi/9e873372599.pdf.
126
127
Ibid., 87-8.
128
See Chapter 2, Figure 2.2.
129
45
Ligeti’s Piano Concerto
1.14 The Creation of the Piano Concerto
Commissioned in the 1970s by conductor Mario di Bonaventura, the Piano Concerto
took several years to complete. It was first premiered as a three-movement version in October
1986 by Mario di Bonaventura and his brother, pianist Anthony di Bonaventura, with the Vienna
Philharmonic, and finally completed in its full five-movement form in 1988.
Ligeti’s difficulty in composing the Concerto is evident not only by its long gestation
period but also by the composer’s sketches, which will be referred to during the course of this
study. Ligeti struggled with what he called “hundreds of attempts”130 of beginning material. In
his article “À qui un hommage? Genesis of the Piano Concerto and the Horn Trio,” Steinitz
counted over 50 ‘beginning’ sketches spanning over six years.131 Constantin Floros also
affirmed: “Between 1980 and 1985, [Ligeti] made several starts, but these never got beyond
diverse beginnings. At least nine different beginnings were rejected. It was only after the
completion of the first several piano etudes in 1984 and 1985 that his plans for the Piano
Concerto began to take definitive form.”132 The immense amount of deliberation involved in the
Concerto’s creation is also evident from Floros’ study of the sketches:
Looking closely at his sketches, one gets a sense of the enormous mental labor
Ligeti invested in this work. There are more drafts for the Piano Concerto than
for any other work: jottings on diverse slips and strips of paper, numerous full
pages covered with verbal notations, and a whole stack of music leaves and
sheets. They vividly document the fact that Ligeti reflected intensively about
every aspect of the projected work. Initially, he seems to have been indecisive
about the exact number of movements, which in the sketches varies between
four and seven. Fairly soon, however, the plan of a five-movement structure
130
György Ligeti, conversation with Steinitz, February 2000, quoted in Steinitz, “Genesis of the Piano
Concerto and the Horn Trio,” 170.
131
132
Floros, Ligeti, 180.
46
appears to have become stabilized, in which the sequence was to be determined
by the twofold contrast principle of fast-slow and hard-soft (Hungarian kemény
and puha).133
Perhaps the “five-movement structure” Floros referred to is the same as the one Steinitz
dated around 1982-3, in which Ligeti included a Prestissimo movement that bore the jotting “a
twisting maelstrom.” 134 This is striking because in his 1988 Piano Concerto notes on the fourth
movement, Ligeti similarly described the fourth movement as a “self-similar maelstrom.”135
Additionally, in his 1988 notes, Ligeti referred to this “self-similar maelstrom” as related to
“musical associations that originated through computer representations of Julia and Mandelbrot
sets.” 136 In 2011, Peitgen revealed ‘the Maelstrom’ (a Julia set image) years after the
composer’s death. ‘The Maelstrom’ will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 2.
Regarding the fourth movement itself, Steinitz observed that it was written mostly after
1987. However, an earlier sketch (refer back to Example 1.1) reveals that the 12-tone pitch
series and the upward contour associated with the series’ first three notes (C# , D# , F# ) and
intervals +2 +3 were determined as early as 1980.
This three-note motive stuck in Ligeti’s mind for it appears in another sketch dated July-
September 1980 (Example 1.8) whose “abrupt, detached phrases anticipate the Piano Concerto’s
fourth movement.”137 In fact, the beginning of the sketch Db - Eb - Gb in accented eighth-quarter-
133
134
135
136
Ibid., 12.
137
47
eighth notes, followed by rests, truly resemble the opening of the fourth, with the same pitches,
+2 +3 intervallic relations, and a similar rhythmic scheme.
Example 1.8 The fourth movement’s beginning 3-note motive (with intervals +2 +3)
in a July-September 1980 Piano Concerto sketch138
138
Found in Steinitz, “Genesis of the Piano Concerto and the Horn Trio,” figure 7, 180.
48
Additionally, a variation of these first three notes occurs in a sketch dated November 26,
1981 (Example 1.9). This time, the three-note motive appears as G, A, C, yet still retains a
similar rhythm to that of the 1980 sketch, with eighth-quarter-quarter. Although this sketch was
written as a possible first movement, the opening gesture clearly resembles the beginning three-
note motive of the fourth movement. The emphasis on intervals [2] and [3] also remain, with
some three-note motives adding on a fourth attack as +2 +3 +1 (which also occurs in
Example 1.8, mm. 2-3).
Example 1.9 The fourth movement’s beginning 3-note motive (with intervals +2 +3)
in a November 26, 1981 Piano Concerto sketch139ß
Regarding a later sketch associated with the fourth movement, Steinitz reported:
A preliminary sketch for movement four contains most of the initial gestures, but
relatively compressed and less dramatic than in the published score. It opens
with the strings’ snap pizzicato but without the side drum rim shot. There is no ff
piano entry in bar 4, nor its two interjections in bars 4 and 8. The piano enters in
bar 9 but at that point the sketch breaks off and Ligeti begins again. This time
the gestures are more dramatically juxtaposed and punctuated by silence. Until
bar 45 the music is almost as published, then becomes sketchy. The overall
shape is discernible, but durations are left to be worked out later. The final pages
are particularly thin and quite unlike the published score…[Ligeti’s] additional
notes could reveal how the process was assembled; but, being handwritten in
sometimes illegible Hungarian, are unfortunately beyond the scope of this
study.140
139
Found in Steinitz, “Genesis of the Piano Concerto and the Horn Trio,” color plate 12.
140
49
1.15 The compositional thinking behind the fourth movement
Below, I include the composer’s complete description of the fourth movement:
I conceive the fourth movement as the central movement of the Concerto.

Its melodic-rhythmic elements (germinal cells or motivic fragments) are
rudimentary. The movement also begins simply, with successions and
superpositions of these elements in harmonic mixture-formations. Here too a
kaleidoscopic structure emerges, for there is a limited number of such elements,
like mosaic-stones, which, in augmentation and diminution, always recur.
Without our realizing it at the beginning, a complex gradually-emerging talea-like
rhythmic order secretly governs. It comprises, as in the first movement, two
simultaneous, out-of-sync temporal levels (once again triple and duple, but with
other asymmetrical structures than in the first movement). Very gradually, as the
initial longer pauses are filled in with motivic fragments, we realize that we are in
the midst of a rhythmic-melodic maelstrom. Without change of tempo, only
through the increasing density of musical events and a rotation of successive and
superimposed, augmented and diminished motivic bits, this density increase itself
suggests acceleration.
Through the recursive structure of the composition, the “always different
yet similar” (all the motivic figures resemble previous motivic figures, without
literally repeating any such figure, while the total structure is also self-similar), the
impression of a huge interconnected network arises. And the initially concealed
rhythmic structures, the two independent temporal levels with their diverse inner
asymmetrical accentuations, gradually becomes manifest.
The self-similar maelstrom goes back – very indirectly – to musical
associations that originated through computer representations of the Julia- and
Mandelbrot sets. In 1984 I first saw these remarkable pictures of fractal structures
produced by two Bremen scientists, Peitgen and Richter. Since then they have
played an important role in my musical conceptions. Not that I have used
algorithms in composing the fourth movement: to be sure, I work by construction;
this however is not based on mathematical considerations, but rather is
“craftsman-construction” (referring to this, my relationship to mathematics is
similar to that of Maurits Escher). It is a matter of intuitive, poetic, synesthetic
correspondences, less like scientific thinking than poetic.141
From his explanation above, Ligeti hinted at several important aspects of the fourth
movement:
1. It is based on “rudimentary,” “melodic-rhythmic elements.”

2. Self-similarity is expressed through the use of “successions,”
“superpositions,” of interrelated figures in “augmentation or diminution,” “the
141
Ligeti, “On My Piano Concerto,” 11-12.
50
[kaleidoscopic] structure of the composition, the ‘always different yet similar’
(all the motivic figures resemble previous motivic figures, without literally
repeating any such figure...)”
3. It “grow[s] from simple to complex”142 with “increasing density” that
“suggests acceleration.”
4. It contains a “complex gradually-emerging, [secretly-governing], talea-like
rhythmic order [which] comprises...two simultaneous, out-of-sync temporal
levels (once again triple and duple…)”
5. It includes “harmonic mixture-formations.”
6. Its structure is “recursive” and “self-similar.” Indirectly, it resembles a “self-
similar maelstrom.”
7. Ligeti's musical-mathematical connection is Escher-like, as a “craftsman-
construction” way of making “intuitive, poetic, synesthetic correspondences
[to pictures of fractal structures], less like scientific thinking than poetic.”
These ideas will be explored in more detail during the analysis of the fourth movement (covered
in Chapters 3-5), which will refer to these points in relation to the “fractal” connection.
142
51
Chapter 2: Explanation of Mathematical Concepts
Inspiration
2.1. Mathematical inspiration for the fourth movement: ‘the Maelstrom’ and ‘29 Arms at
Seahorse Valley’
In addition to Ligeti’s 1988 “On My Piano Concerto,” there are two other sources that
mention the inspiration of the Piano Concerto’s fourth movement. The first and most
illuminating is Peitgen’s 2011 article “Continuum, Chaos and Metronomes – A Fractal
Friendship,” which I will refer to throughout this chapter. The second is Richard Steinitz’s
biography György Ligeti: Music of the Imagination (2003), which cites Peitgen’s study ‘29 Arms
at Seahorse Valley’ as “direct inspiration”1 for the fourth movement. In his 2011 article, Peitgen
provided images of the ‘Ligeti fractal’ (Figure 2.1), which the mathematician named in the
composer’s memory, as well as a magnified portion of it, ‘the Maelstrom’ (Figure 2.2).
Although ‘the Maelstrom’ and ‘29 Arms at Seahorse Valley’ might appear to be different things,
we will see that they are most likely referring to the same ‘Ligeti fractal.’

1
52
Figure 2.1 The ‘Ligeti fractal’2
Figure 2.2 ‘The Maelstrom,’3 a magnified portion of the ‘Ligeti fractal’

2
Peitgen, “A Fractal Friendship,” 95, figure 2.
3
Peitgen, “A Fractal Friendship,” 104-5, figure 6.
53
Upon superficial glance, “the Maelstrom” consists of many self-similar spirals and can be
seen as a gigantic spiral itself. Whirling tendrils emerge wildly from each shape. Self-similarity
at every scale – small, medium, and large – can be perceived in this spinning, complex image.
The potential for infinity – that the image continues spiraling ever closer to its center while
simultaneously expanding past its outer edges – is also suggested. Lastly, one might observe the
increased density of the image as one approaches the center, as though one were drawn into an
enormous suction. This echoes Ligeti’s remarks of a “geometric vortex” with “ever-decreasing
rhythmical values produc[ing] the sensation of a kind of acceleration.”4
Julia and Mandelbrot Sets
2.2 The ‘Ligeti fractal’ as a Julia Set
Probing deeper, one learns that ‘the Maelstrom’ (and by extension, the ‘Ligeti fractal’) is
a Julia set. Julia sets refer to geometric shapes resulting from points plotted on the complex
plane5 (Figure 2.3). Most Julia sets are fractal, and their construction will be explained further in
Subsections 2.5 to 2.8.
Figure 2.3 Various Julia sets6

4
Ligeti, interview by Tünde Szitha, “A Conversation with György Ligeti,” 16.
5
A plane consisting of complex numbers.
6
Randall Pyke, “Some Julia Sets,” Math 335, University of Toronto, February 20, 2005.
http://www.sfu.ca/~rpyke/335/juliasetsrot.gif.
54
Ligeti would have known about Julia sets as well as the related Mandelbrot set (from
which Julia sets are derived), given his study of fractal geometry where both sets play an
important role. Additionally, the books7 Ligeti acknowledged reading focus on these topics, and
the expertise of Ligeti’s mathematician friends8 Mandelbrot and Peitgen also center on these sets.
Lastly, in his 2011 article on Ligeti, Peitgen discussed escape and prisoner sets,9 concepts
directly associated with Julia and Mandelbrot sets, for the purposes of “at least hint[ing] at what
Ligeti found so fascinating with the Julia set.”10
2.3 A Brief Introduction to Julia and Mandelbrot Sets
A series of papers published in 1917 and 1918 led to the creation of Julia sets by
mathematician Gaston Julia. Although Julia wrote about these sets, he actually never saw them
and could only imagine them. His work generally remained forgotten until after the invention of
computers, which enabled Benoît Mandelbrot around 1979 to reveal the fractal structures of
many Julia sets through several iterated steps. This was done in conjunction with the Mandelbrot
set, which shares the same algorithm11 as the Julia set, but requires a different manipulation of
the variables. As one mathematician put it:
What is so remarkable…about the Mandelbrot set [and by extension, the Julia set]
is that although it is infinitely complex, it’s based on incredibly simple
principles…In fact, anyone who can add and multiply can understand the
principles on which it is based…[I]n principle, it could have been discovered any
time in human history…But the problem was this, although [the algorithm is]
only based on adding and multiplying, you have to carry out those operations
millions, billions of times to create complete set. And that’s why it was not
discovered until the era of modern computers.12

7
See Chapter 1, Subsection 1.10.
8
See Chapter 1, Subsection 1.13.
9
See Subsection 2.5.
10
11
See Subsection 2.5.
12
Nigel Lesmoir-Gordon, Arthur Clarke, Benoît Mandelbrot, and Ian Stewart, The Colours of Infinity:
The Beauty and Power of Fractals (New York: Springer-Verlag London Limited, 2010), 148-149.
55
2.4 Correlations between Julia and Mandelbrot Sets
In order to understand the connection between Peitgen’s ‘29 Arms at Seahorse Valley’
and the ‘Ligeti fractal’ one must first comprehend the relation between Mandelbrot and Julia
sets. To begin with, there are an infinite variety of Julia sets, each corresponding to a “seed” (i.e.
a point identified by some c-value13) selected from the Mandelbrot set (Figure 2.4). In this way,
the Mandelbrot set can be considered a map of all Julia sets.
Figure 2.4 Julia sets corresponding to points on the Mandelbrot set14 (red circle and arrow
mine). This image is taken from Peitgen and Richter’s 1986 book The Beauty of Fractals. Note
that Julia sets differ in appearance, depending on the location of their corresponding point c on
the Mandelbrot set. Additionally, the Julia set labeled “6” (in the red circle) correlates to c = -
0.74543 + 0.11301i and bears resemblance to the ‘Ligeti fractal.’

13
See Subsection 2.5 for the algorithm used to generate Mandelbrot and Julia sets.
14
Heinz-Otto Peitgen and Peter Richter, The Beauty of Fractals: Images of Complex
Dynamical Systems (New York: Springer-Verlag, Inc., 1986), xii.
56
The title of Peitgen’s study ‘29 Arms at Seahorse Valley’ can also be clarified. To explain
the study’s title, “arms” refer to decorations that ‘grow’ from the Mandelbrot set’s heart-shaped
cardioid (the main ‘body’). Mathematicians alternatively refer to these as “limbs,” “buds,” or
“bulbs.” In Figure 2.5, the ‘body’ is labeled period number 1, and the next-largest bulb (the
‘head’) is marked period number 2. These numbers refer to long-term periodic, or cyclic,
behavior. For example, period 1 means that a system will eventually stabilize to a single, fixed
state, whereas period 2 indicates that a system will settle into an oscillation between 2 states, i.e.
State A à State B à State A à State B... In the Mandelbrot set, points within the ‘body’ will
lead to single-state outcomes, whereas those in the ‘head’ will produce a pattern of alternation
between two states. This will be explained in more depth in Subsection 2.5.
Figure 2.5 The Mandelbrot set with “bulbs” (labeled according to period number)15

15
Hoehue~commonswiki, “Mandelbrot Set – Periodicities Coloured,” Wikimedia Commons, October 31,
2005. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0e/Mandelbrot_Set_%E2%80%93_
Periodicities_coloured.png.
57
‘Seahorse Valley’ refers to the location between the Mandelbrot set’s ‘head’ and ‘body’
(Figure 2.6). The name ‘Seahorse Valley’ alludes to the reoccurring spirals, which resemble
seahorse tails.
Figure 2.6 Seahorse tails in ‘Seahorse Valley’16

16
Wolfgangbeyer, “Mandel zoom 01 head and shoulder,” Wikimedia Commons, December 4, 2006.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ee/Mandel_zoom_01_head_and_shoulder.jpg
58
Figure 2.7 shows “Figure 15” from Peitgen and Richter’s The Beauty of Fractals, a Julia
set taken from an unidentified c-value in ‘Seahorse Valley.’
Figure 2.7 “Figure 15” from Peitgen and Richter’s The Beauty of Fractals, which bears striking
resemblance to the ‘Ligeti Fractal’17
Given the close resemblance between the Julia set “6” from Figure 2.4, “Figure 15,” and
the ‘Ligeti fractal,’ one might stipulate that they are all the same or at least, very similar. This
connection is supported by Peitgen’s footnote regarding the ‘Ligeti fractal:’ “I would like to
thank Hartmut Jürgens for once again reconstructing this image as a printable copy. The only
copy I had was an illustration from one of my books from 1986.”18 Although Peitgen did not
name the title of the book in his footnote, The Beauty of Fractals was published in 1986, and
Julia set “6” and “Figure 15” were taken from it.

17
Peitgen and Richter, The Beauty of Fractals, 15, figure 15.
18
59
It also seems likely that Peitgen’s “29 Arms at Seahorse Valley” referred to the ‘Ligeti
fractal.’ In The Beauty of Fractals, the number ‘29’ was mentioned in connection to “Figure
15:”
Another noticeable feature is the similarity of in the structure of a detail in the

Mandelbrot set to the form of the corresponding Julia set. The Julia set in Fig.
15 belongs to a value of c in the vicinity of the tail of the sea-horse…The
qualitative similarity of the forms is amazing. It goes so far that the number of
spiral arms which issue from the eyes is 29 in each case.19 (bold mine)
Constructing Julia and Mandelbrot Sets
2.5 Iterating Mandelbrot Sets
Both Mandelbrot and Julia sets are based on the same algorithm z(n+1) = z(n)2 + c, in which
n refers to the step number, and z and c represent complex variables. As a recursive function,
z(n+1) refers to the next step after z(n). For instance, z(2) is the next step after z(1), and z(0) refers to a
function’s starting point. We might also observe that this algorithm requires a process of
feedback – the result from Step 1 or z(1) must be plugged back into the equation to determine
Step 2 or z(2). Additionally, as we may recall, a complex variable represents a complex number,
that is, the sum of a real number plus an imaginary one. Imaginary numbers are indicated by i,
where i = −1. Thus, examples of complex numbers are 1 + i, 5 + -3i, and -0.74543 + 0.11301i.
Lastly, the Mandelbrot and Julia sets use the algorithm in different ways. For the purposes of
calculating the Mandelbrot set, one begins with z(0) = 0, while altering values for c. For
determining a Julia set, one adheres to some unchanging c-value, while varying values for z.

19
Peitgen and Richter, The Beauty of Fractals, 15.
60
In Table 2.1, the algorithm is iterated for points on the Mandelbrot set. To begin as
simply as possible, I have chosen real values c = 1 and c = -1. Note that these are reduced from
their complex forms c = 1 + 0i and c = -1+ 0i, respectively. We can see that the result from the
first iteration z(1) is ‘fed back’ into the algorithm to produce z(2). Likewise, z(2) is ‘fed back’ into
the algorithm to produce z(3). The same process occurs for the fourth and fifth iterations and can
be repeated an infinite number of times.
Table 2.1 An escape vs. prisoner set
Let z(0) = 0 and c = 1 Let z(0) = 0 and c = -1
First iteration: First iteration:

z(1) = (0)2 + 1 z(1) = (0)2 + (-1)
=0+1 = 0 + (-1)
=1 = -1
Second iteration: Second iteration:
z(2) = (1)2 + 1 z(2) = (-1)2 + (-1)
= 1+ 1 = 1 + (-1)
=2 =0
Third iteration: Third iteration:
z(3) = (2)2 + 1 z(3) = (0)2 + (-1)
= 4+ 1 = 0 + (-1)
=5 = -1
Fourth iteration: Fourth iteration:
z(4) = (5)2 + 1 z(4) = (-1)2 + (-1)
= 25 + 1 = 1 + (-1)
= 26 =0
Fifth iteration: Fifth iteration:
z(5) = (26)2 + 1 z(5) = = (0)2 + (-1)
= 676 + 1 = 0 + (-1)
= 677 = -1
Table 2.1 also demonstrates two types of behavior, depending on the value of c. With
c = 1, iteration of the algorithm leads to exponential increase with the sequence 1, 2, 5, 26, 677
heading toward ∞. With c = -1, on the other hand, iteration results in a perpetual oscillation
between -1 and 0. The first type of behavior is described as escaping, while the second type
61
remains imprisoned or bounded. These two types of behaviors are fundamental to studies of
Mandelbrot and Julia sets and are explained in Peitgen’s 2011 article, which suggests the
composer would have been familiar with them. Additionally, the concept of infinity (associated
here with escape sequences) seemed to be of particular interest to Ligeti. Peitgen in his 2011
article mentioned that he and Ligeti “discussed the role of inifinity and its many forms in
mathematics.”20
Regarding the Mandelbrot set, it contains only c-values which result in sequences that do
not escape upon iteration. Therefore, the Mandelbrot set (the dark portion of the graph) consists
of c-values associated with prisoner sets while the white portion includes c-values corresponding
to escape sets. This is apparent in Figure 2.8, which shows c = 1 lying outside the Mandelbrot
set and c = -1 remaining inside the Mandelbrot set.
Figure 2.8 c = -1, c = -0.5, and c = 1 on the Mandelbrot set21 (red labeling mine)

20
21
62
Additionally, as indicated by its location within the Mandelbrot’s ‘head’(i.e. the Period 2 bulb
shown in Figure 2.5), c = -1 leads to a sequence which will ultimately be trapped in a period 2
cycle, oscillating between the solutions 0 and -1 (refer back to Table 2.1).
We might also note that when we discuss fixed or periodic behavior, we refer to long-
term behavior, as the system might act chaotically in earlier stages. As in Figure 2.8, c = -0.5 is
located within the ‘body’ or Period 1 bulb, meaning that it will stabilize to a single state.
However, this is not immediately obvious, as it will not reach that state until 49 iterations (Table
2.2). With other cases, one must iterate thousands of steps in order to reach a certain result.
Indeed, this is why fractal geometry and chaos theory were not explored in depth until after the
invention of computers, due to the amount of time it would take to iterate by hand.
63
Table 2.2 Table of Iterations at z(0) = 0 and c = -0.5
!"#$%"&'()* +#,-."&(/)!
0 1234
5 12354
6 1237684
7 1236294:69
4 1237278;::
; 12366;0;06
8 12369;::4;
9 1236425677
: 1236886649
02 123648;088
00 12368502:;
05 1236;04677
06 1236;:5:59
07 1236;6;559
04 1236;88894
0; 1236;786:
08 1236;;:;44
09 1236;466;7
0: 1236;;45:7
52 1236;4;4;5
50 1236;;5:44
55 1236;4958;
56 1236;;0825
57 1236;4:0:7
54 1236;;026
5; 1236;4:;9;
58 1236;;2;8
59 1236;4::4
5: 1236;;2788
62 1236;;22:0
60 1236;;2686
65 1236;;20;8
66 1236;;2609
67 1236;;2528
64 1236;;2599
6; 1236;;255:
68 1236;;2585
69 1236;;2570
6: 1236;;25;7
72 1236;;2578
70 1236;;254:
75 1236;;254
76 1236;;2548
77 1236;;2545
74 1236;;254;
7; 1236;;2546
78 1236;;2544
79 1236;;2546
7: 1236;;2547
42 1236;;2547
40 1236;;2547
45 1236;;2547
46 1236;;2547
47 1236;;2547
44 1236;;2547
64
2.6 Iterating Julia Sets
For Julia sets, we use the same algorithm z(n+1) = z(n)2 + c but assign some value for c to
calculate for z. Again, for the sake of simplicity, I have assigned real numbers to variables by
reducing away their imaginary components. The simplest example of a Julia set is when c = 0.
Table 2.3 shows a chart of sequences for z(0) = 2 and z(0) = 1.
Table 2.3 An escape vs. prisoner sets
Let c = 0 and z(0) = 2 Let c = 0 and z(0) = 1 Let c = 0 and z(0) = 0.5
First iteration: First iteration: First iteration:

z(1) = (2)2 + 0 z(1) = (1)2 + 0 z(1) = (0.5)2 + 0
=4+0 =1+0 = 0.25 + 0
=4 =1 = 0.25
Second iteration: Second iteration: Second iteration:
z(2) = (4)2 + 0 z(2) = (1)2 + 0 z(2) = (0.25)2 + 0
= 16 + 0 =1+0 = 0.0625 + 0
= 16 =1 = 0.0625
Third iteration: Third iteration: Third iteration:
z(3) = (16)2 + 0 z(3) = (1)2 + 0 z(3) = (0.0625)2 + 0
= 256 + 0 =1+0 = 0.00390625 + 0
= 256 =1 = 0.00390625
Fourth iteration: Fourth iteration: Fourth iteration:
z(4) = (256)2 + 0 z(4) = (1)2 + 0 z(4) = (0.00390625)2 + 0
= 65,536 + 0 =1+0 = 0.000015259 + 0
= 65,536 =1 = 0.000015259
In Table 2.3, we have an escape set at z(0) = 2, a fixed result at z(0) = 1, and a prisoner set at z(0) =
0.5. While the first sequence escapes toward ∞, the second stays the same, and the last
approaches 0. Therefore, for this particular Julia set, we can summarize three types of behaviors
upon iteration:
With | z | > 1, the sequence will approach ∞.

With | z | = 1, the sequence will remain on 1.
With | z | < 1, the sequence will approach 0.
65
We can thus consider ∞ an attractor for escape sequences and 0 an attractor for prisoner
sequences. An attractor refers to some state representing a system’s long-term behavior.22 When
graphed, the Julia set at c = 0 actually resembles a filled circle with the radius of 1 (Figure 2.9).
As most Julia sets are fractal, this Julia set is the exception. It is introduced as an example,
however, because it is the simplest type of Julia set.
Figure 2.9 The Julia set at c = 0 (blue filling, mine)23
2.7 Graphing on the Complex Plane
Both Julia and Mandelbrot sets are graphed on the complex plane whose x-axis represents
real numbers and y-axis refers to imaginary ones. This means one essentially ignores the

22
Steven Strogatz, “Chaos,” the Great Courses lecture series Course Guidebook, Glossary (Ithaca:
Cornell University, The Teaching Company, 2008), 125.
23
Randall Pyke, “Julia Sets,” Math 335, University of Toronto, February 20, 2005.
http://www.sfu.ca/~rpyke/335/juliamovie.html.
66
imaginary component for the purposes of graphing, i.e. c = -0.25 + 0.75i will correspond to the
(x, y) point at coordinates (-0.25, 0.75). Without delving into a discussion of imaginary numbers,
it suffices to show how complex numbers are plotted by labeling them on the Mandelbrot set
(Figure 2.10).
Figure 2.10 Complex c-values on the Mandelbrot set24 (red labeling mine)
In Figure 2.10, we can see how the c-value -0.74543 + 0.11301i (which I stipulate belongs to or
is close to the c-value for the ‘Ligeti fractal’) is located in the Mandelbrot set’s seahorse valley.

24
67
2.8 Connected and Disconnected Julia Sets
The vast majority of Julia sets are intricate, requiring several iterations in order to be
viewed in relative entirety. Additionally, because there are an infinite number of them, it is
impossible to view them all. Fortunately, even without undergoing numerous iterations to
categorize every type of Julia set, one can glean the nature of a Julia set by the position of its c-
value on the Mandelbrot set. If the c-value is located within the Mandelbrot set, its Julia set will
be connected, i.e. in one whole piece. If the c-value is outside the Mandelbrot set, its Julia set
will be disconnected, i.e. endlessly fragmented into an infinite number of separate pieces. Other
descriptions for disconnected Julia sets include “dust” or “Cantor Julia sets.” This is due to the
similarity in their structure to the Cantor dust fractal (compare Figures 2.11 and 2.12 in which
structures’ middle thirds are progressively removed).
Figure 2.11 The first eight stages in the construction of Cantor dust25
Figure 2.12 The first eight stages in the construction of a Julia Cantor set26 (reconstruction first
seven stages, mine)

25
Jim Belk, “Notes – Julia Sets and the Mandelbrot Set,” resource for “Math 323: Dynamical Systems”
course, Bard College, accessed June 18, 2015, 7.
http://math.bard.edu/belk/math323/NotesJuliaMandelbrot.pdf.
26
Belk, “Notes – Julia Sets and the Mandelbrot Set,” 8.
68
Additionally, disconnected Julia sets behave chaotically. Peitgen wrote of this in his 2011 Ligeti
article and implied the composer’s deep understanding of them:
Depending on how [ c ] is chosen, the Julia set either is a dust – that is, a Cantor
set – or it is not (more precisely, a connected set). When it is dust, the iteration
on the Julia set is chaotic, and so fractals and chaos come together again. In fact,
in the last decades, mathematicians and scientists have learned that chaos and
fractals form a twin pair: if a process is chaotic it typically leaves a fractal trace,
and the process behind a fractal is often chaotic.
Our many conversations helped Ligeti to work out for himself these dimensions
in great depth and his fascination was comparable to that of those who had first
made discoveries in the 20th century.27
Lastly and most significantly, if the ‘Ligeti fractal’ corresponds to “Figure 15” from The
Beauty of Fractals, it is a disconnected Julia set, as the description corresponding to
“Figure 15” referred to it as an example of a Cantor Julia set.

27
69
A Deeper Study of Chaotic Systems
2.9 The Logistic Map: Periodic, Chaotic, and Intermittent Behavior
In order to better understand chaotic behavior, let us refer to the bifurcation diagram of
the logistic map, which acts a model for a universal “route from order into chaos”28 (Figure
2.13). In Chaos and Fractals, a book Peitgen alluded to in his 2011 Ligeti article and which
discusses all concepts presented in this chapter, Peitgen, Jürgens, and Saupe elaborated: “ ‘Route’
means that there are abrupt qualitative changes — called bifurcations — which mark the
transition from order into chaos like a schedule, and ‘universal’ means that these bifurcations can
be found in many natural systems both qualitatively and quantitatively.”29
Figure 2.13 The logistic map30 showing the “route from order to chaos” (labeling, mine)
At first, the logistic map shows a system whose final states reveal a predictable pattern of
behavior. The system tends to settle into one state (a single line), then two (branching into two

28
29
Ibid., 542.
30
PAR~commonswiki, “LogisticMap BifurcationDiagram,” Wikimedia Commons, September 14, 2005.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/LogisticMap_BifurcationDiagram.png.
70
lines), four (branching into four lines), eight (i.e. branching into eight lines), and so on. This is
known as period-doubling. Peitgen, Jürgens, and Saupe explained:
Where we see just one branch, the long-term behavior of the system tends towards
a fixed final state, which, however, depends on the parameter. This final state
will be reached no matter where…we start. When we see two branches this just
means that the long-term behavior of the system is now alternating between two
different states, a lower one and an upper one. This is called periodic behavior.
Since there are two states now, we say that the period is two. Now, when we see
four branches all that has happened is that the period of the final-state behavior
has increased from two to four. That is period-doubling: 1 à 2 à 4 à 8 à 16 à
. . . 31
Period doubling eventually converges to an accumulation point, which looks like a wall of
extreme density “where the fig tree becomes infinitely bifurcated and chaos ensues…Hence, the
accumulation point also marks the onset of chaos.”32 After the accumulation point, the system
behaves mostly chaotically (right side of the logistic map). However, there are certain regions
where the system reverts to periodic behavior. These periodic windows appear as open intervals
in the diagram. In Figure 2.13, we can see that the widest window is a Period 3 window.
Lastly, the inclusion of periodic windows within chaos means that the system fluctuates between
stability and instability as well as predictability and unpredictability – a behavior known as
intermittency. This will be discussed in relation to the fourth movement of Ligeti’s Piano
Concerto in Chapters 3, Subsection 3.11, which connects the piece’s rhythm to intermittent
behavior.

31
32
Strogatz, “Chaos,” 125.
71
2.10 The U-Sequence
A sequence called the U-sequence33 1, 2, 4…6, 5, 3, 6, 5, 6, 4, 6, 5, 6 can be used to
summarize the logistic map’s ‘route to chaos’ by listing periodic behavior up to period 6. Even
though periodicity of all numbers exists (during period doubling and even within the chaotic
region), higher period numbers are mostly imperceptible in the graph. This is due to the fact that
higher periodicities are extremely unstable and do not last.
Toward the top of Figure 2.13, part of the U-sequence is labeled. The beginning 1, 2,
4… refers to the stable period-doubling section. This predictable phase reaches an accumulation
point (implied by the “…” of the U-sequence), and the system turns chaotic. Within the chaos,
we have sections of periodic stability (periodic windows) which begin as 6, 5, 3, 6, 5, 6, 4, 6, 5,
6. As we will find, a portion of this U-sequence (the last seven numbers) appears in the solo
piano’s rhythm toward the end of the fourth movement of Ligeti’s Piano Concerto. This will be
examined in Chapter 3, Subsection 3.11.

33
This is also known as the MSS Sequence, named after Metropolis, Stein, and Stein. Nicolas Metropolis,
Myron Stein, and Paul Stein, “On finite limit sets for transformations on the unit interval,” Journal of
Combinatorial Theory, Series A, 15 (1973): 25-44.
72
2.11 Correlation between the Logistic Map and the Mandelbrot Set
Periodic, chaotic, and intermittent behaviors are also found in the Mandelbrot set. In
Figure 2.14, the locations on the logistic map demonstrating periodicity and chaos align with
those on the Mandelbrot set.
Figure 2.14 Correspondence between the Logistic Map and the Mandelbrot Set34
At c = 0.25 in the Mandelbrot set, the period 1 bulb aligns with the single fixed state of the
logistic map. At c = -0.75, the period 2 bulb corresponds to the first bifurcation. At c = -1.25,
the period 4 bulb correlates with the second bifurcation. The accumulation point of the logistic
graph approximately lines up with the Mandelbrot at c = -1.401155. Thereafter, the left part of
the Mandelbrot set (resembling a stem) matches with the chaotic region. Lastly, the mini-
Mandelbrot at c = -1.75 links with the Period 3 window of the logistic map.

34
Laura Brinks, “Fractals and Chaos” (Masters Thesis, Iowa State University, 2005), 23.
73
2.12 A Closer Look at the Butterfly Effect
In his 2011 article on Ligeti, Peitgen extensively discusses the butterfly effect. We can
also recall from Chapter 1, Subsection 1.2, Figure 1.5 that Ligeti himself doodled a butterfly at
the back of a sketch and mentioned the butterfly effect during an interview.
The butterfly effect has its origins in a study by Edward Lorenz, who was attempting to
develop a model for weather forecasting by manipulating equations on the computer. Rather
than discovering a long-term method for predicting the weather, Lorenz instead discovered the
butterfly effect in association with the computer’s tendency to round off numbers. Lorenz wrote:
[T]his all started back around 1956 when some…methods of [weather]

forecasting had been proposed as being the best methods available, and I didn’t
think they were. I decided to cook up a small system of equations which would
simulate the atmosphere, solve them by computers which were then becoming
available, and to then treat the output of this as if it were real atmospheric
observational data and see whether the proposed method applied to it would
work.
…
I had a small computer in my office then, so I typed in some of the intermediate
conditions which the computer had printed out as new initial conditions to start
another computation [i.e. an iterative process] and went out for a while. When I
came back I found that the solution was not the same as the one I had before; the
computer was behaving differently. I suspected computer trouble at first, but I
soon found that the reason was that the numbers I had typed in were not the same
as the original ones. [T]hese [former ones] had been rounded off numbers and
the small difference between something retained to six decimal places and
rounded off to three had amplified in the course of two months of simulated
weather until the difference was as big as the signal itself. [T]o me this implied
that if the real atmosphere behaved as in this method, then we simply couldn’t
make forecasts two months ahead. [T]hese small errors in observation would
amplify until they became large.35
In his 2011 article, Peitgen noted that although “rounding off… do[es] not explain chaotic
behavior [nor] is…the cause of chaos, it…helps chaos to occur”36 and can be used to

35
Peitgen, Jürgens, Saupe, and Zahlten in Fractals – An Animated Discussion, film, Freeman 1990,
quoted in Peitgen, Jürgens, and Saupe, Chaos and Fractals, 46-7.
36
74
demonstrate how “iterative processes can easily slip into chaos.”37 As an example, Peitgen wrote
a formula two different ways,38 which should be mathematically equivalent through the
expansion property:39
1.
!!!! = !!! 1 − !!
! = 0, 1, 2, 3, …
2.
!!!! = !!! − !!! !
! = 0, 1, 2, 3, …
As a starting point, Peitgen had the computer start with x0 = 0.3 and a = 4. The experiment
consisted of having the computer iterate results of both equations independently, showing these
results as numbered lists in two charts that corresponded to the two equations. The results were
aligned in rows according to the number of iterations (i.e. referred to as a ‘position number’). In
theory, because both equations were mathematically equivalent, we would expect the results of
the same position numbers to be equivalent. However, while comparing the two lists, Peitgen
made the following observations:
At first, “the result is the same [for both equations]…[I]n the 44th position, the first
process (after 43 steps) generates value 0.703252615, whereas the second process
in the same position results in value 0.703252614! Nearly the same result, but not
exactly the same! At the ninth digit after the decimal point there is a difference of
1…This is the point where chaos is setting in.
If we compare positions 45 to 69, we see that this minute difference continues to

grow. At position 69 the difference has reached the second digit after the decimal
point…the difference between the two processes (iterations) has grown to about
one-hundredth and this is equivalent to a growth factor of 10 million! Again,
between step 45 and step 69, or just 14 iterations, the difference has increased by a
factor of 10 million, while between steps 2 and 44 everything looked tame, or like
expected…What follows gets stranger and stranger. If we compare both positions
at 75, we have 0.98350222 in the first process and 0.005438503 in the second!

37
Ibid., 100.
38
Ibid., 98.
39
We might recall the expansion property which states that a (b – c) = ab – ac. Given this, we can
deduce that !!! 1 − !! = !!! − !!! ! .
75
...
Which of the two processes is correct and which is faulty? It is not possible to say
for sure because chaos has struck. How can we explain this? One of the reasons
why this can happen lies in the way computers calculate. They calculate pretty
exactly, but not entirely exactly, and they do not accept decimal numbers with
many digits, let’s say, not more than 16. All numbers that need more digits are
drastically rounded off at 16. This may sound extreme but you really don’t notice
it in everyday use because the difference is so tiny. And remember, chaos means
that the smallest differences can cause the greatest impact.40
Therefore, this ‘butterfly effect,’ assisted by ‘rounding off,’ creates a snowballing effect. The
tiny differences caused by approximations are compounded as iterations continue over time.
2.13 The Lorenz Attractor
The Lorenz attractor (Figure 2.15) refers to the fractal representation of chaotic processes
discovered in connection with Lorenz’s weather experiment.
Figure 2.15 The Lorenz attractor41
It is known as a strange attractor, i.e. a graphic visualization of a collection of states representing
a system’s long-term and self-sustaining chaotic behavior.42 Like the Chaos Game, one cannot

40
41
76
always determine which point of the strange attractor will be plotted next on the graph.
Additionally, no matter the order in which these points appear, they will eventually create the
same fractal shape. In the Lorenz experiment, these points are ‘attracted’ to a specific fractal
trajectory resembling a pair of butterfly wings.
Although the pair of butterfly wings seems to join at the center, in reality, they do not
intersect. Instead, no point is in exactly the same location as another, which means that no state
ever repeats. This bears resemblance to Ligeti’s childhood nightmare (mentioned in Chapter 1,
Subsection 1.12) where he dreamed of his bedroom filled with a huge, tangled web in which
transformations were “irreversible”43 and “no earlier state could ever recur.”44 In the Lorenz
attractor, points that appear to occur in the same spot are actually layered over each other. In this
way, one can imagine the butterfly wings as actually consisting of an infinite number of layers.
One might also observe the similarities with the kneading of dough metaphor, which involves
“infinitely thin layers of dough.”45

42
Strogatz, “Chaos,” 125.
43
Ligeti, “States, Events, Transformations,” 165.
44
Ibid.
45
77
Ideas from Douglas Hofstadter
2.14 Broader Connections with Gödel’s Theorem of Inconsistency
The idea of error can be extended to embrace a more general concept of imperfection.
Gödel’s theorem, for example, reveals limitations in the mathematical system itself. Gödel’s
theorem is also a main topic in Hofstader’s Gödel, Escher, Bach. Ligeti mentioned the impact of
Hofstadter’s books Gödel, Escher, Bach and its sequel Metamagical Themas. Furthermore,
Peitgen commented on a conversation in which he and Ligeti discussed Gödel’s theorem.46
One of Gödel’s arguments centers on inconsistency. “In classical bivalent logic, every
well-formed formula is either true or false. This gives rise to Gödel’s metatheoretical dilemma
proving that logic with arithmetic can only be complete at the expense of consistency, and
conversely [that logic with arithmetic can only be consistent if incomplete].”47 In essence, no
system is complete without including paradoxes
(inconsistency). Conversely, if a system is consistent, then it is incomplete.
Figure 2.16 likewise demonstrates incompleteness and inconsistency in mathematical
systems.

46
47
Dale Jacquette, “Diagonalization in Logic and Mathematics,” in Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 2nd
ed., Volume 11, ed. Dov Gabby and Franz Guenthner (Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004), 110.
78
A Standard math: 1 + 1 = 2
In the case of raindrops: 1 raindrop + 1 raindrop = 1 raindrop
B Euclid: The sum of the angles of a triangle = 180 degrees.

Spherical geometry: The sum of the angles of a triangle is greater than 180 degrees but less
than 540 degrees.
C Standard math: 0. 9 = 0. 9
However, one can prove 0. 9 = 1.
Let x = 0. 9
10x = 10(0. 9) Multiply x by 10
= 9.9
10x – x = 9.9 - 0.9 Subtract x
9x = 9
x=1
Therefore, 0.9 = 1 Substitution property
Figure 2.16 Inconsistency in Mathematical Systems. A, Various interpretations of 1 + 1.

B, Euclidean vs. spherical geometry. C, Proving 0. 9 = 1.
In order for the cases in Figure 2.16 to be true, we would either have to move out of the
mathematics system (which implies the incompleteness of the system to embrace all truths) or
stretch the system to include these inconsistencies. If making an association with Ligeti’s
interest in approximations, it seems the latter is most relevant. As we will see, rather than
adhering to consistency within a piece, the fourth movement embraces imperfection, by growing
increasingly inconsistent, particularly in the coda.
79
Part II: Analysis
80
Chapter 3: Rhythm / Form
3.1 Overview of Chapters 3-5
Part II focuses on an analysis of the fourth movement and is divided according to musical
parameters – rhythm / form (Chapter 3), melody / motive (Chapter 4), and harmony (Chapter 5).
Although musical examples are presented throughout each chapter, the reader can refer to the
reduced score in Appendix A for an analysis of the complete movement.
Each chapter contains analysis and musical-mathematical associations. While musical
analyses provide a solid foundation, discussion of musical-mathematical analogies takes on a
more exploratory and hypothetical direction. The goal is to offer new perspectives on the fourth
movement by integrating traditional music analysis with ideas from Ligeti’s mathematical
inspirations. My belief is that the inclusion of mathematical concepts will only enrich one’s
understanding of the piece. This approach also aligns with the composer’s suggestion that the
listener have “a certain level of education”1 and sensitivity to his music’s associative aspects.
Floros wrote: “Ligeti remarked once that his music could…be heard without any knowledge of
these associations [but] a listener who experienced it in its historical context would get more out
of it, since as ‘Bildungsmusik’ (music of erudition) its full understanding presupposed a proper
connoisseurship.” 2
1
Ligeti, in conversation with Werner Klüppelholz, Was ist musikalische Bildung? Musikalische
Zeitfragen 14, 1984): 70, quoted and translated in Floros, Ligeti, 28.
2
Ligeti, in conversation with Klüppelholz, 66f, quoted and translated in Floros, Ligeti, 69.
81
3.2 Summary of Mathematical Concepts Aspects
As a starting point, let us summarize some distinguishing characteristics from
mathematical sources of inspiration mentioned in Chapters 1 and 2. Although Ligeti
acknowledged the “fractal” connection in his 1988 notes, I also include concepts from chaos and
Hofstadter because these were additional influences during the conception of the Piano
Concerto. Indeed, some ideas which Ligeti mentioned in his 1988 notes are not strictly “fractal”
but are more relevant to chaos, such the composer’s incorporation of a “complex, gradually-
emerging [secretly-governing], talea-like rhythmic order,” which is examined in Subsection 3.10.
Therefore, the following ideas shall serve as “common denominator[s]”3 between the
music and the math, and I shall refer to these aspects throughout the discourse, i.e. Fractal
Aspect 1 or Chaos Aspect 2.
Fractals
1. Fractals tend to be characterized by their “irregular and very fragmented” nature.
2. Fractals reflect self-similarity at multiple scales.
3. The construction of fractals progress from simplicity to complexity, often demonstrating
increase as a space-filling or space-creating property.
4. The generation of fractals involves iteration or repetition.
5. The fractal experience often involves zoom sequences or “[f]ocusing on smaller and
smaller details.”4
Chaos
1. Chaos demonstrates a juxtaposition of order and disorder. While in the short-term,
events appear random, in the long-term, a secret order is revealed.
2. A chaotic system is characterized by its sensitivity to initial conditions and the butterfly
effect (i.e. the “amplification of error.”5)
3. In a chaotic system, no state is ever exactly repeated.
4. A chaotic system displays intermittency, meaning that at times, the system reverts to
periodic behavior before returning to unpredictable chaos.
3
4
Ligeti, conversations with Richard Steinitz, February 25-27, 2000, quoted in Steinitz, Music of the
Imagination, 328.
5
Stewart, Nature’s Numbers, 112.
82
The Logistic Map
Periodic behavior in the logistic map can be summarized by the U-sequence.
Mandelbrot and Julia Sets

1. Mandelbrot and Julia sets contain escape sequences, whose behavior can be
characterized as exponentially increasing toward infinity.
2. Disconnected Julia sets behave chaotically.
Hofstadter
Gödel’s theorem of Inconsistency and Incompleteness can relate to the imperfection of a
system (which is either complete but inconsistent, or consistent but incomplete).
Rhythm
3.3 An Underlying Rhythmic Pattern
In his 1988 notes, Ligeti hinted at a hidden rhythmic pattern, which “comprises...two
simultaneous, out-of-sync temporal levels (triplet and duple, but with other asymmetrical
structures).” This pattern, 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 2 is found in Ligeti's sketch materials at the Paul
Sacher Foundation (Example 3.1).
Example 3.1 Ligeti, sketch revealing the fourth movement’s rhythmic pattern6
6
György Ligeti, sketch, György Ligeti Collection, Paul Sacher Foundation, Basel. Found in Lefresne,
“Applications of Chaos Theory and Fractals in Ligeti,” 88.
83
Comprising a total of 24 pulses, it is asymmetrically grouped as 11 + 13 or 13 + 11.7 Ligeti
vertically aligned the two talea of sixteenth and triplet eighth notes. One can see that cycles of
sixteenths and triplet eighths converge every 6 measures. Within the period of six measures,
there are 4 cycles of the sixteenth-note talea (Talea 1) and 3 cycles of the triplet-eighth-note talea
(Talea 2). For this reason, I will refer to this 6-measure unit as a supercycle. Additionally, we
might note that Ligeti marked these supercycles as “4 x 24” for Talea 1 and “3 x 24” for Talea 2
in his sketch (Example 3.1).
Ligeti also grouped each cycle from both taleae within brackets, marking “24” above
every grouping. He also wrote the pattern in terms of held or tied notes (i.e. 2 sixteenths as 1
eighth or 2 triplet-eighths as a triplet quarter). This indicates that sustained durations are
liekwise considered to be a grouping of “2” or “3” even if their subdivisions are not overtly
stated. Lastly, Ligeti wrote approximate timings in terms of minutes for the movement.
Although Ligeti had referred to the medieval talea concept in his discussion with Floros
about the first movement’s pizzicato talea (see Subsection 1.6), the grouping can be also
understood in terms of the Sub-Saharan African polyrhythmic principle of rhythmic oddity. This
concept appears in Simha Arom’s book African Polyrhythm and Polyphony, to which Ligeti
wrote the Preface. Moreover, Ligeti’s rhythmic pattern is very similar to a pattern that appears in
Simha Arom’s chapter “Strict Polyrhythmics:”8 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 2, 3.
Below is Arom’s explanation the principle of rhythmic oddity:
One particular form of asymmetry which is very frequently found

in Central Africa may be called rhythmic oddity. When the
number of pulsations in the periods involved is divided by two, the
7
This grouping bears similarities to the Concerto’s first movement string pizzicato talea which also has
24 pulses asymmetrically divided into groupings of 13 + 11.
8
Arom, African Polyphony and Polyrhythm, 247.
84
result is an even number. The figures contained in this period are
nevertheless arranged that the segmentation closest to the middle
will invariably yield two parts, each composed of an odd number
of minimal values, wherever the dividing line is placed. These
figures are always constructed by the irregular juxtaposition of
binary and ternary quantities...They follow a rule which may be
expressed as ‘half-1 / half+1.’9
Arom used the rhythmic pattern 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 2, 3 to demonstrate this principle: “[A] cycle of
[nine] pulsations divided into twenty-four operational values may be arranged…as 2 • 3 • 3 • 3 /
2 • 3 • 3 • 2 • 3 = 11 / 13 = 12 – 1 / 12 + 1.”10 Similarly, the grouping of 11 + 13 can be found in
the fourth movement’s pattern 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 2 which also has “twenty-four operational
values” that can be grouped as 2 • 3 • 3 • 3 / 2 • 3 • 3 • 3 • 2 = 11 / 13 = 12 – 1 / 12 + 1.
Ligeti adds an element of complexity by expressing the fourth movement’s 2, 3, 3, 3, 2,
3, 3, 3, 2 pattern of duple and triple ‘beats’ (or Arom’s “pulsations”) as two “out-of-sync” taleae
of sixteenth and triplet eighth-note base durations. Roland Willmann11 believed that the two
taleae are interwoven as:
Talea 1: 2, 3, 3, 3, 2 | 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 2 etc.
Talea 2: 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 2 | 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 2 etc.
However, this is incorrect, as by m. 8, the music diverges from Talea 1 (Example 3.2). Instead,
both taleae begin on the same first duple ‘beat’ (as in Example 3.3), a rhythmic alignment
supported by Ligeti’s own sketch.
9
Ibid., 246.
10
Ibid., 247.
11
Roland Willmann, Gebannte Zeit: Studien zum Klavierkonzert György Ligetis (Studia Musicologica
Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, T. 42, Fac. 3/4 (2001): 391-472.
85
Example 3.2 Incorrect alignment of Talea 1
Example 3.3 Correct alignment of first 12 measures
86
The Rhythm as “Fractal” and “Chaotic”
In Subsections 3.4 - 3.12, the rhythm will be examined in relation to Fractal Aspects 1, 2,
3, 4, and 5, Chaos Aspects 1, 3, and 4, the logistic map’s U-sequence, and Mandelbrot and Julia
Sets Aspects 1 and 2. Of all these mathematical connections, the rhythm’s association with
Chaos Aspect 1 (Subsection 3.10), i.e. revealing a secret order in the longterm, seems especially
significant. This is because Ligeti’s previous works do not contain this type of “complex
gradually-emerging, [secretly-governing], talea-like rhythmic order.”
3.4 Fractal Aspect I –An “Irregular and Very Fragmented” Rhythmic Surface
At the beginning, the rhythm’s extreme disjointedness resonates with Fractal Aspect 1,
an “irregular and very fragmented” surface. This is due to the preponderance of silences, which
ironically behave more disruptively than sounds. Unpredictable and at times, unusually long,
silences interrupt the music so the listener cannot grasp any obvious rhythmic pattern. The
feeling of jaggedness is exacerbated by Grand Pauses – even two in a row at measures 5-6 (refer
back to Example 3.3).
Grand Pauses also appear at measures 30, 42, and finally, 155. In Talea 1, the silent
cycles (including the G.P.s) are: Cycles 2, 4, 5, 15, 17, 19, 20, 24, 28, 31, 39, 43, 44, and 104. In
Talea 2, the silent cycles (again including the G.P.s) are: Cycles 3, 7, 15, 21, 28, and 78.
Complete silent cycles occur over a span of the first 66 measures before disappearing entirely
before the final G.P. at measure 155.
The pattern itself is also “irregular,” given its asymmetrical division of 11 + 13 or 13 +
11, rather than 12 +12, and its manifestations are often “very fragmented,” due to (a) the
tendency of expressing incomplete rhythmic cycles and (b) frequent changes of instrumentation
87
when full cycles are articulated. Example 3.4 shows a continuation of Example 3.3 with mm.
13-24 still containing incomplete rhythmic cycles at Talea 1’s Cycles 9 and 12-16 as well as all
cycles in Talea 2. Even Talea 1’s Cycles 10-11, which are ‘complete’ (the string chord from
mm. 13-14 continues into m. 15), contain sustained attacks that give the impression of space.
Example 3.4 mm. 13-24 expressing incomplete rhythmic cycles (circled)
88
Even when complete cycles are articulated, such as in Talea 1’s mm. 148-155 (Example 3.5),
frequent changes of instrumentation break these cycles into irregular and fragmented parts.
89
Additionally, the movement ends mid-cycle (Cycle 103) very typical of Ligeti (i.e. along the
lines of a note or phrase being “torn off”12).
Example 3.5 Talea 1’s complete rhythmic cycles with frequent changes of instrumentation
(mm. 148-155)
12
Ligeti commonly used the instruction “as though torn off.” Among the pieces it appears include his
Cello Concerto (1966), String Quartet no. 2 (1968), Continuum (1968), Deux Etudes “Coulee” (1969),
San Francisco Polyphony (1974), Piano Etude “Automne a Varsovie” (1985), and Sonata for Solo Viola
(1994).
90
Lastly, expressions of the pattern are “irregular,” with a mixture of duple and triple
‘beats,’ rather than a strand of even pulsations. In other words, the ‘beat’ for the fourth
movement is a non-traditional changing one that does not adhere to “regular” uniform durations.
91
Certainly, the fourth movement contains no regular meter that is perceived as such, despite its
notation of 4/4, which exists only for the convenience of the performers.
3.5 Fractal Aspect 2 – Self-Similarity at Multiple Scales
The rhythmic pattern itself is self-similar with two repeating units of 2, 3, 3, 3, as the first
8 ‘beats,’ i.e. 2, 3, 3, 3 | 2, 3, 3, 3. The last 4 ‘beats’ of the pattern, 3, 3, 3, 2 is also the same unit
backwards. Moreover, the entire rhythmic pattern is replicated in the large-scale form, which
will be discussed in more detail in Subsection 3.6.
The presence of “simultaneous augmentation and diminution” as one “focus[es] on
smaller and smaller details”13 is similar to zooming into a fractal (Figure 3.1).
13
Imagination, 328.
92
Figure 3.1 Zoom sequence into the Mandelbrot set14
Zooming into the Mandelbrot set not only reveals microscopic, self-similar detail but also
blown-up portions of shapes already viewed. At successive stages of magnification, shapes “like
14
Peitgen, Jürgen, and Saupe, Chaos and Fractals, 798, figure 14.11.
93
mosaic-stones”15 recur in “simultaneous augmentation and diminution.” We see tinier and tinier
replications of seahorse tails in Panels C-H. Likewise, we see Mandebrots in Panels A-B and F-
H. Thus, we can understand Benoît Mandelbrot’s enthusiasm for the set’s infinite variety in
conjunction with self-similarity at all levels:
In the Mandelbrot set, nature (or is it mathematics?) provides us with a powerful

visual counterpart of the musical idea of ‘theme and variation:’ the same shapes
are repeated everywhere, yet each repetition is somewhat different […] Because of
its constant novelty, this set is not truly fractal by most definitions, we may call it a
borderline fractal, a…fractal that contains many fractals. Compared to actual
fractals, its structures are more numerous, its harmonies are richer, and its
unexpectedness is more unexpected.16
To musically analogize a zoom sequence, large shapes can correspond to motivic figures
moving at a slow pace, filling in long stretches of time. Small shapes can correlate with figures
written in shorter durations, filling in short spans of time. The co-existence of various temporal
sizes of self-similar shapes can therefore suggest the presence of figures moving at multiple
speeds. This resonates with Ligeti’s “rhythmic fractals” in which “a set of durations associated
with a motive get stretched and compressed and maybe layered on top of each other”17 (Example
3.6).
15
16
Mandelbrot, from an interview in the film Fractals, An Animated Discussion, quoted in Peitgen,
Richter, and Saupe, Chaos and Fractals, 783. Note Mandlebrot’s informal connection between
mathematics and nature goes against the argument that “[m]athematics is neither Nature, and nor does it
live independently from nature, but instead it reflects a human-readable nature” (Pareyon, “On Musical
Self-Similarity,” 29).
17
Ibid.
94
Example 3.6 “Rhythmic fractals” (stretched and compressed motives) at mm. 116-118
In Example 3.6, we have “simultaneous augmentation and diminution” in Talea 1 with
the piccolo/oboe/clarinet/xylophone line being “stretched,” while the piano is compressed. A
third layer is added with the bassoon/horn at mm. 117-118 with rhythmic values aligning with
each ‘beat,’ which I label “standard.” In Talea 2, more layers accumulate with the extremely
“stretched” strings and “compressed” piano at mm. 117-118. Again, a “standard” rhythmic
version is present at m. 116 with the trumpet / trombone. Note that the yellow and blue
highlights refer to motives based on pitch order-position numbers 3-8 and 9-12, respectively.
The motivic aspect will be discussed more in regard to the fourth movement’s 12-tone series in
Chapter 4 on melody / motive. It suffices for now to glean a superficial understanding by
comparing rhythmic manifestations of motives constructed upon similar gestures.

95
Ligeti’s “rhythmic fractals” (or “simultaneous augmentation and diminution” of a
motive) are certainly not new ideas, but rather another way of perceiving traditional
compositional techniques. I include them in this section to connect the composer’s description
of “rhythmic fractals” to the shared musical and mathematical aspect of self-similarity. In other
words, seeing the “remarkable pictures of fractal structures [Mandelbrot and Julia sets] produced
by two Bremen scientists, [Heinz-Otto] Peitgen and [Peter H.] Richter”18 could have served to
confirm traditional musical techniques Ligeti was already using.
3.6 Fractal Aspect 2 – the Fourth Movement Form as An Extension of Rhythm
Regarding the overall form of the fourth movement, it is useful to consider supercycle
units. Again, one supercycle = six measures (or four cycles in Talea 1 and three cycles in Talea
2). In this way, the fourth movement can be divided into twenty-six supercycles.
Let us list some musical markers that hint at the fourth movement’s form:
1. G.P.s
2. A ‘return’ of the beginning at mm. 65-66 in Talea 2 which refers back to
the initial rising figure from m. 1
3. A dramatic climactic section at mm. 127-145 with full pitch series
statements as well as the piano’s motion to extreme registers, dynamics, and
articulations
4. A coda at m. 145, with the piano’s exit and rapid orchestral disintegration
Touching upon the points above, the G.P.s align at the ends of Supercycles #1, #5, #7,
and 26 at mm. 5-6, m. 30, m. 42, and the final measure (m. 155) respectively. Referring to the
‘return’ at mm. 65-66, this is an obvious audible signal, during which the same instrumentation
(woodwind/horn/rim shot/snap pizz), rising figure, ff dynamic, and accented articulation as
18
96
measure 1 reappear (Example 3.7). In particular, the very distinct rim shot makes the reference
clear.
Example 3.7 m. 1 and the ‘return’ at mm. 65-66
The ‘return’ at measures 65-66 seems to indicate a clear sectional boundary, especially as it
marks the cut off of fully silent cycles19 before the G.P. at the very end. However, this ‘return’
of the beginning at approximately 42% through the entire movement is an oddly early placement
for a ‘recapitulation.’
This location can be explained if we associate the ‘return’ with Supercycle #12, and the
coda at m. 145 with Supercycle #25. Note that Supercycle #12 actually aligns with m. 67,
indicating that the ‘return’ is about 1 measure early. Hence, I approximate mm. 65-66 with
Supercycle #12. Therefore, one might consider the form:
A: Supercycles #1-11 (total of 11 supercycles)

A’: Supercycles #12-24 (total of 13 supercycles)
Coda: Supercycles #25-26 (total of 2 supercycles)
Excluding the coda, this structure is consistent with Ligeti’s description of it being “recursive”
and “self-similar” in that it mirrors the rhythmic pattern’s asymmetrical grouping of 11 + 13:
(2 + 3 + 3 + 3) + (2 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 2) = 11 + 13
19
Recall that completely silent cycles span the first 66 measures before disappearing entirely before the
final G.P. at measure 155.
97
Therefore, the form20 itself can be understood as an expression of self-similarity, given that
behaves as a larger-scale manifestation of the rhythmic pattern. We will also find in Chapter 5
that the wedge-like shape of the piece, with its dramatic build-up and climax in the penultimate
section of the piece at mm. 127-145, is mimicked on multiple scales harmonically (Chapter 5,
Subsection 5.8).
3.7 Fractal Aspect 3 – Simplicity à Complexity and Space-Filling Tendency
The sense of slowly filling in sections of the rhythmic pattern that initially were silent
connects with Fractal Aspect 3’s increasing complexity and density. Comparing beginning,
middle, and ends of the movement gives an overview of these tendencies. We will examine only
Talea 1 in detail, as Talea 2 behaves similarly.
At the beginning (Example 3.8), Talea 1's first cycle has only the first 3 attacks (out of a
total of 9 attacks) sounding. The rest of the cycle remains silent. The entire second cycle does
not sound at all. The third cycle again has only three attacks sounding, and the fourth cycle is
completely silent.
Example 3.8 Talea 1’s Cycles 1-4 (mm. 1-6) containing a majority of silence
20
Note that the rhythmic pattern is labeled in the reduced score (Appendix A) with duple ‘beats’ in square
enclosures and triple ‘beats’ in triangular enclosures.
98
In Example 3.9,Talea 1's first full cycle statements (Cycles 10 and 11) start in the middle of
measure 14. However, most of the attacks are expressed as held or tied notes. These sustained
notes are another way of creating ‘space’ similar to rests. The strings begin at m.13 and last for
over 3 measures until m. 16. (Again, note that the entire string duration is omitted in the reduced
score). The total number of sounding attacks during Cycles 10-11 (mm. 14-17) is 3 out a total of
18. We might also re-visit Examples 3.3 and 3.4 (mm. 1-24) to compare the number of sounding
attacks versus those which are silent or sustained.
Example 3.9 Talea 1’s Cycles 10 and 11 (mm. 14-17) with sustained notes that create the
illusion of ‘space.’ Only three out of a eighteen attacks are articulated.
Fast-forwarding to the middle of the movement (Example 3.10), Talea 1 has more
sounding attacks. In Cycles 53-54, eleven out of eighteen attacks are heard, compared to three
out of eighteen in Example 3.9.
99
Example 3.10 Talea 1’s Cycle 53-54 (mm. 79-81) containing more sounding attacks. Eleven out
of eighteen attacks are expressed.
In Example 3.11, another excerpt from the middle of the movement, we can see again that more
of the talea is filled in with sounding attacks, compared to the beginning of the movement
(Examples 3.8 and 3.9).
100
Example 3.11 Talea 1’s Cycles 65-72 (mm. 97-108) middle of the movement with more
articulated attacks
101
By the end of the movement (Example 3.12), almost triple and duple ‘beats’ are
articulated. Additionally, with most rhythms expressed in diminution, along with the
accumulation of articulations, such as the double accent at m. 139 and m. 141, the music
increases drastically in complexity.
Example 3.12 Talea 1’s Cycle 93-103 (mm. 139-155) with all attacks articulated, except at m.
141 and m. 142 (circled)
102
3.8 Fractal Aspect 4 - Iteration
The rhythm clearly shows iteration as a deep-level pattern. Whether stated or silent, the
2, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 2 iterates (or repeats) throughout the entire movement in both taleae.
Moreover, as in fractal iteration, in which the same process occurs over and over again, this
underlying rhythmic pattern remains constant with unvarying repetition.
3.9 Fractal Aspect 5 – “Focusing on smaller and smaller details”
As mentioned in Chapter 1, Subsection 1.11 and Ligeti’s own notes in Chapter 1,
Subsection 1.15, the feeling of acceleration is generated by using smaller and smaller note
values.
103
3.10 Chaos Aspect 1 (Juxtaposition of Order and Disorder) and Chaos Aspect 3 (Absence
of Exact Repetition)
The pattern being “secret” and “gradually-emerging” suggests Chaos Aspect 1, in
which a hidden order is concealed in the short-term and revealed only in the long-term.
This is perhaps one of Ligeti’s more unique ideas, and it resonates with Peitgen’s
description in his 2011 article: “Chaos lies much, much deeper, hidden in the process.”21
In the short-term, one discovers the fourth movement’s rhythmic manifestations behave
unpredictably and chaotically. Indeed, there exists no pattern for determining which duple
or triple ‘beats’ will be articulated, which will remain silent, or the manner in which they
will be expressed. Even in the rare instances the same attacks are articulated in a similar
manner, the ways in which those attacks are manifested always differ. This suggests Chaos
Aspect 3, in which no previous state is ever repeated, and will be explored in more detail in
Chapter 4 on melody / motive, Subsection 4.3.)
At the same time, the underlying rhythmic pattern remains fixed and absolute.
Thus, beneath an unpredictable, “fractal” surface are strands of unchanging 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3,
3, 3, 2 that reveal themselves only after numerous iterations. This is similar to the Chaos
Game (Chapter 1, Subsection 1.2, Figure 1.4), the Lorenz attractor (Chapter 2, Subsection
2.13), and even the Mandelbrot set (Figure 3.2) in which fractal structures appear after
several iterations. In this way, the fourth movement’s rhythm demonstrates the peculiar
juxtaposition of order and disorder that we associate with deterministic chaos.
21
104
Figure 3.2 The Mandelbrot set at 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, and 2000 steps22
3.11 Logistic Map Correlation – The U-Sequence – and Chaos Aspect 4 (Intermittency)
Oddly, a portion of the U-sequence, whose full form is 1, 2, 4…6, 5, 3, 6, 5, 6, 4, 6, 5, 6
(see Subsection 2.10), appears in the rhythm of Concerto’s fourth movement. The portion (6), 5,
6, 4, 6, 5, 6 occurs repeatedly as an expression of every other attack at Talea 1’s mm. 127-141 in
the piano (Example 3.13).
22
Renato Fonseca, “The Mandelbrot Set,” October 27, 2015. http://renatofonseca.net/mandelbrotset.php.
105
Example 3.13 U-Sequence (circled) at mm. 127-141
106
While it is unclear whether the correspondence with the U-sequence was intentional or
coincidental, this segment occurs roughly 4 times. In this way, the music demonstrates Chaos
Aspect 4, in that it behaves quasi-periodically before reverting to unpredictable chaos in the
coda.
We might note that the first U-sequence segment at m. 127 omits the first ‘6’ from the
sequence. However, this version finds its foreshadowing at Talea 2’s mm. 57-60 in gestures
expressed by bassoon/trumpet/bass and flute/strings (Example 3.14) which likewise skips the
first ‘6.’
Example 3.14 U-Sequence foreshadowing at mm. 57-60
We can deduce that the U-sequence portion, 6, 5, 6, 4, 6, 5, 6, occurs within the chaotic
region of the logistic map (see Chapter 2, Subsection 2.9, Figure 2.13). Likewise, its placement
at mm. 127-141 is at its most dramatic (and chaotic!) section of the fourth movement, which
builds to a point of maximum intensity. Rhythmically, almost every attack is articulated (refer
back to Example 3.13). Additionally, at the end of Talea 1’s m. 141, the piano reaches the
107
highest note on the keyboard,23 a fffff dynamic, and an accumulation of 5 marcato articulations.
The impression of a climax is exaggerated when one considers Ligeti’s instructions, i.e.
“marcatissimo, staccatissimo, martellato” at m. 127, the very start of the build-up, which also
includes a fff dynamic and two marcato articulations.
The subsequent retreat at Talea 2’s mm. 142-146 ends with the lowest possible note of
the piano on a (supposedly) softer dynamic than ppppp (Example 3.15).
Example 3.15 piano (mm. 141-146) reaching the highest possible pitch, articulation, and
dynamic to lowest possible pitch, lightest articulation, and dynamic (circled)
Extreme range also occurs in instruments of the orchestra, such as the double basses’ high
harmonics at Talea 1’s mm. 153-154 and piccolo’s low notes at Talea 1’s mm. 153-154
(Example 3.16).
23
Note that precise octaves of pitches and details of contour are not shown in my music examples or
reduced score (Appendix A).
108
Example 3.16 Extreme range at mm. 153-154 with piccolo low notes and double bass harmonics
Other examples suggesting climax happen in the orchestra. The double accent is found at Talea
2’s mm. 132, Talea 1’s m. 137, and Talea 2’s mm. 137-139 (Example 3.17).
Example 3.17 Double accents suggestion climax
a. m. 132, strings
b. m. 137, flute/oboe/violins
109
c. mm. 137-138, woodwinds/brass/strings, and mm. 138-139, clarinet/trumpet (green notes)
Similarly, other accumulated articulation includes any combination of two of the following: ^
> or ´ , such as at Talea 1’s m. 127, piano (refer back to Example 3.13).
In Example 3.18, the orchestra also reaches ‘accumulated’ dynamics, such as ffff (Talea
1’s m. 140) and pppp (both talea’s m. 154).
Example 3.18 Accumulated dynamics (circled)
a. ffff at m. 140, piccolo/string pizz.
b. pppp at m. 154, strings
110
3.12 Mandelbrot and Julia Sets Aspects 1 and 2 (escape sequences and disconnectedness)
We can relate this penultimate section at mm. 127-145 with Mandelbrot and Julia Sets
Aspects 1 and 2. The motion to registral, dynamic, and articulation extremes could resemble a
musical analogy of escape sequences rushing to infinity. Additionally, the fact that disconnected
Julia sets behave chaotically could be associated with the piece’s disjointed and chaotic nature.
Therefore, the fourth movement’s rhythm can be analyzed from a musical-mathematical
perspective. The rhythm displays characteristics of “irregular[ity] and fragment[ation]” (Fractal
Aspect 1), self-similarity (Fractal Aspect 2), a space-filling tendency (Fractal Aspect 3), iteration
(Fractal Aspect 4), and “focusing on smaller and smaller details” (Fractal Aspect 5). It also
expresses a juxtaposition of order and disorder in which a secret pattern is slowly revealed
(Chaos Aspect 1). Additionally, no specific rhythm is ever exactly repeated (Chaos Aspect 3),
and the rhythm fluctuates between periodicity and aperiodicity (Chaos Aspect 4). Lastly, the
rhythm contains part of the U-sequence (related to the logistic map), and the penultimate section
of the piece can more generally relate to Mandelbrot and Julia sets.
111
Chapter 4: Melody / Motive
4.1 Overview of the Melody / Motive
As discovered in his 1980 sketch (Chapter 1, Subsection 1.6), Ligeti based the fourth
movement on prime forms of a 12-tone series (Example 4.1).
Example 4.1 Prime forms of the 12-tone series (reconstructed from Roland Willmann1)

1
Willmann, Gebannte Zeit, 468.
112
Similar to the rhythm, the way in which the 12-tone series behaves can be understood as
“fractal” or “chaotic.” In Subsections 4.2 - 4.14, the melodic / motivic treatment of the 12-tone
series will be connected to Fractal Aspects 1, 2, and 4, Chaos Aspects 1, 2, and 3 as well as
Gödel’s Theorem of Inconsistency and Incompleteness.
The Melody / Motive as “Fractal and Chaotic”
4.2 Fractal Aspect I – “Irregular and Very Fragmented”
For the majority of the movement, the 12-tone series appears as “irregular and very
fragmented” pieces. Willmann noted that the prime forms are generally divided into fragments
of 3, 5, and 4 notes respectively (indicated by the measure divisions in Example 4.1). Perhaps
these fragments are what Ligeti referred to in his 1988 notes when he mentioned the piece’s
“melodic-rhythmic [rudimentary] elements (germinal cells or motivic fragments).” These
“melodic-rhythmic elements” recur in ever-changing guises and do not truly ‘develop,’ but rather
replicate in an unpredictable manner. In this way, we can understand Ligeti’s 1988 description
of such “melodic-rhythmic elements” acting as “mosaic-stones” and creating “a kaleidoscopic
structure” by “always recur[ring].”2 We can also relate Ligeti’s idea of “germinal cells” to
Peitgen and Richter’s remarks about ‘Figure 15’ from The Beauty of Fractals (which either is or
strongly resembles the ‘Ligeti fractal’) in which the authors alluded to a “cell contain[ing] the
complete genome…but at any point…only a small selection is actually expressed.”3
For the sake of simplicity, I shall refer to such “melodic-rhythmic elements” as Gestures
1, 2, and 3 (Example 4.2). Gesture 1 consists of 3 pitches that usually ascend in contour.

2
3
113
Gesture 2 contains 5 pitches that generally fall as a type of lamento motif.4 Gesture 3
encompasses 4 pitches and appears as a zigzag. Willmann referred to Talea 1’s m. 1, Talea 2’s
mm. 7-8, and Talea 2’s mm. 19-20 as examples of each gesture, respectively (Example 4.3).
Although the ways in which these three gestures will be expressed will not always adhere to
specific contours, such correspondences provide ‘models’ from which a multitude of variations
can be generated.
Example 4.2 Gestural directions correlating with the 12-tone series
Example 4.3 First appearances of Gestures 1-3 (m. 1, mm. 7-8, and mm. 19-20)
Similar to the jagged rhythmic surface, the fragmented presentation of the 12-tone series
brings out Fractal Aspect 1. The first appearances of the pitch series, for instance, span across

4
Amy Bauer in Ligeti’s Laments: Nostalgia, Exoticism and the Absolute (Burlington: Ashgate Publishing
Company, 2011) connected this figure with Ligeti’s lamento motif. The lamento not only pays homage to
its Renaissance and Baroque ancestors (such as the lamento-bass of Purcell), but also to memories of the
composer’s childhood in which he remembers the moans of “paid mourners in the houses of those who
had died” (Steinitz, Music of the Imagination, 254-5). It also appeared in the last movement of the Horn
Trio (1982), the Piano Concerto’s second movement (1980-88), Piano Etudes, Books I (1985) and II
(1988-94), and the Violin Concerto (1989-93).
114
measures 1-10 as P1 in Talea 1 and P0 in Talea 2 (Example 4.4). Both pitch series presentations
are “very fragmented,” whose “motivic bits” are separated by rests. Each fragment corresponds
roughly to one of the three gestures or a hybrid of gestures. I have labeled and color-coded each
of the fragments, according to the gesture it most closely resembles.
Example 4.4 Gestures 1-3 as creating an “irregular and very fragmented” surface (mm. 1-10)
In Example 4.5, motivic bits continue to comprise the piece’s “irregular and very
fragmented” surface in an increasingly dense and complex manner. From the instrumentation,
115
phrasing, dynamics, and articulations, it is clear that these fragments function as discrete,
disconnected, and independent units.
Example 4.5 Gestures 1-3 creating an “irregular and very fragmented” surface (mm. 92-94)
Only toward the end (Examples 4.6 and 4.7) do we encounter uninterrupted presentations
of the 12-tone series. Even then, rests isolate each attack as though to discourage any feeling of
continuity. Harmonic statements of entire prime forms occur in the solo piano at Talea 1’s mm.
128-141 (Example 4.6) as P0, P8, P3, P11, P7, P2, P10, P6, P1, and P9. As full linear statements, they
appear at Talea 2’s mm. 130-144 (Example 4.7) as P8, P0, P7, and P3. These complete cycles
begin with the string pizzicato in Talea 2’s mm. 130-141 and continue with the solo piano at
mm. 141-144. While most of the fourth movement switches instrumentation for each phrase,
116
mm. 130-141 sustain the same instrumentation (i.e. bass pizzicato) for 12 measures without
interruption.
Example 4.6 Talea 1’s mm. 127-141, piano, full harmonic statements
117
Example 4.7 Talea 2’s mm. 130-144, full linear statements
118
Fractal Aspect 2 – Self-Similarity
4.3 Motivic Self-Similarity
We may refer to Ligeti’s 1988 notes, in which he described the fourth movement's
characteristic of self-similarity, i.e. “all the motivic figures resemble previous motivic figures,
without literally repeating any such figures.” This not only relates to Fractal Aspect 2, self-
similarity at multiple scales, but also to Chaos Aspect 3, which follows the principle of non-exact
repetition. As the three gestures permeate the entire movement in a variety of guises, every
melodic idea can be associated with one of these gestures.
In regard to Fractal Aspect 2, it is important to observe an important difference between
music and mathematics. Whereas mathematics seeks to remove as much deviation and
indeterminism as possible by seeking absolute proofs, the opposite holds true for music.
Deviation from a ‘model’ or ‘pattern,’ especially when considering multiple scales, creates
richness and expression in music.
This is evident in traditional tonal music and explored in Schenkerian analysis, which
shows that “motivic relations are always associative” and “most hidden repetitions routinely
involve a change in fit [the way in which an object and its enlargement lie within—or cut
across—boundaries] between an object and its derivation.”5 In regard to “hidden repetitions,”
i.e. those which lie below the surface, these will be revealed more in Chapter 5 on the fourth
movement’s harmony, in particular, Subsection 5.5. Thus, Fractal Aspect 2 must be interpreted
more flexibly, due to the fact that varied repetition (rather than exact repetition) is the norm for
music.

5
Brian Alegant and Donald McLean, “On the Nature of Enlargement,” Journal of Music Theory 45, no. 1
(Spring 2001): 33.
119
Additionally, we may recall the idea that mathematical ideas might have served to
reinforce musical techniques Ligeti was already incorporating. In the case of the fourth
movement’s use of motivic ‘varied repetition,’ this scenario seems especially likely. An unusual
aspect of the movement, however, is that the principle of ‘varied repetition’ is taken to the
extreme, as there is not a single instance of exact repetition (Chaos Aspect 3). Steinitz also noted
the sheer amount of gestural repetition on the musical surface:
[W]e do find in this movement a particular musical gesture repeated endlessly at

different magnifications. Augmentation and diminution are, of course, long
established compositional techniques. But Ligeti goes further. The movement is
literally flooded with iterations of a three-note fragment [Gesture 1], its
extensions, contractions and derivatives – all progressively superimposed in
varying tempos, with varying articulation, coloration and magnitude. The musical
design builds up like a complex graphic image scanned, pixel by pixel, on a
computer screen. By the end of the movement we’ve arrived at an elaborate,
multi-dimensional fantasy of self-replicated whirls, riotous color and polymetric
energy, an exuberant vortex of order and chaos, symmetry and freedom, like the
magnificent fractal images of Mandelbrot and Peitgen.6
Ligeti’s use of varied repetition seems to resemble a picture in which short motivic
fragments (i.e. three gestures) are often layered on top of each other in a repetitive or iterative
manner (Fractal Aspect 4). Complexity arises from the interaction and increasing density of
these gestures, rather than by motivic development. Augmentation and diminution also suggest
“different [levels] of magnification” by expressing the same gestures at various tempos.
This type of motivic self-similarity resonates with Douglas Hofstadter’s remarks on
Escher’s Butterflies wood engraving (Figure 4.1) from Gödel, Escher, Bach:
What is there that is the “same” about all the butterflies? The mapping from one
butterfly to another does not map cell onto cell; rather, it maps functional part onto
functional part, and this may be partially on a macroscopic scale, partially on a
microscopic scale. The exact proportions of parts are not preserved; just the
functional relationships between parts. That is the type of isomorphism which
links all butterflies in Escher's wood engraving Butterflies to each other.
...

6
Steinitz, “Weeping and Wailing,” 22.
120
We keep on running up against "sameness-in-differentness", and the question
When are two things the same?
It will recur over and over again in this book.
…
That this issue arose in the Chapter on recursion is no accident, for recursion is a
domain where “sameness-in-differentness” plays a central role. Recursion is based
on the “same” thing happening on several different levels at once. But the events
on different levels aren't exactly same – rather, we find some invariant feature in
them, despite many ways in which they differ.7
Figure 4.1 Escher, Butterflies wood engraving8
Ligeti’s use of motivic self-similarity thus hints at infinite variation, due to the complete
and deliberate absence of exact repetition. This shares an affinity with Benoît Mandelbrot’s
celebration of the Mandelbrot set as containing “constant novelty” with “the same

7
Hofstadter, Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Brain (New York: Basic Books, 1979), 155-6.
8
Maurits Escher, Butterflies, 1950, wood engraving, 13.38 by 12.2 in. (34 by 31 cm.), Wiki Art, accessed
August 15, 2015. http://www.wikiart.org/en/m-c-escher/butterflies.
121
shapes…repeated everywhere, yet each repetition is somewhat different.”9 Most importantly, it
relates to the ‘Ligeti fractal,’ which (I stipulate) appears as ‘Figure 15’ from The Beauty of
Fractals. In reference to ‘Figure 15,’ Peitgen and Richter observed:
It is apparent that each locus of [the Mandelbrot set] defines [Julia set] motifs. If
we wander along the border of [the Mandelbrot set], we notice a gradual
metamorphosis of these [Julia set] motifs…At any given place, the motif is taken
through an infinite number of variations.10
Next, we will examine some examples of Gestures 1, 2, and 3 from the fourth movement’s
surface which reflects this type of self-similarity that, as Hofstadter described in reference to
Escher, retains “some invariant feature in them, despite many ways in which they differ.”
4.4 Gesture 1
Gesture 1 is typically rising, accented, and assertive, with a rhythmic profile starting with
a short-long (SL) pattern. This characterizes the first gesture ‘model,’ as evident in Talea 1’s m.
1 (refer back to Example 4.3). Examples following this ‘model’ include Talea 2’s mm. 65-66,
which alludes back to the beginning (Example 4.8) as well as Talea 1’s mm. 10-11 and m. 102,
which likewise bear similarities to each other (Example 4.9).
In Example 4.8, Talea 2’s mm. 65-66 is an obvious reference to the opening, given that
the same instrumentation (woodwind/horn/rim shot/snap pizz.), rising figure, SL rhythmic
profile, ff dynamic, and accented articulation as measure 1 reappear. In particular, the very
distinct rim shot makes the allusion clear. The pitch order position-numbers suggest rotation
from 1, 2, 3 at m. 1 to 2, 3, 4 at mm. 65-66. Although the pattern of ‘beat’ attacks remains the
same (as 2, 3, 3), their positioning on the rhythmic pattern is shifted. Measures 65-66 has

9
Mandelbrot, from an interview in the film Fractals, An Animated Discussion, quoted in Peitgen, Richter,
and Saupe, Chaos and Fractals, 783.
10
122
Gesture 1 on the second half of the rhythmic pattern, 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, rather than on the
first, 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, as in m. 1.
Example 4.8 Gesture 1 ‘model’ at m. 1 compared to Gesture 1 at mm. 65-66. Gesture 1 usually
has an assertive character, upward direction, and starts with a SL rhythm. The rim shot at both
m. 1 and m. 65 creates a clear audible connection.
In Example 4.9, both occurrences of Gesture 1 at mm. 10-11 and m. 102 follow the
assertive, rising character of the ‘model’ yet add a fourth attack to the 3-note ‘model.’
Additionally, when comparing mm. 10-11 with m. 102, both Gesture 1 variations are similar to
each other. They contain the same SL rhythmic profile, 2, 3, 3, 3 ‘beats,’ positioning in the
rhythmic pattern, pitch order position-numbers, and a similar dynamic. However, the
instrumentation and articulation details have changed.

123
Example 4.9 Gesture 1 at mm. 10-11 compared to Gesture 1 at m. 102. Both Gesture 1s
have an assertive character, rising contour, SL rhythm, 2, 3, 3, 3 ‘beat’ pattern, positioning
in the rhythmic pattern, and pitch order position-numbers. Gesture 1 at m. 102 adds an
extra attack.
Other instances of Gesture 1 can be found at Talea 1’s mm. 39-40, Talea 2’s mm. 45-46,
and Talea 1’s mm. 119-120 (Example 4.10). All of these Gesture 1s portray an assertive
character, a SL rhythm, and an upward contour (despite the octave displacements in my reduced
score).
124
Example 4.10 More manifestations of Gesture 1 as typically assertive, ascending in contour,
with a SL rhythm
a. Gesture 1 at mm. 39-40
b. Gesture 1 at mm. 45-46
c. Gesture 1 at mm. 119-120
125
4.5 Gesture 2
The second gesture is usually falling, quiet, and legato, with a tendency to elongate the
penultimate pitch. This is evident from the second gesture ‘model’ at Talea 2’s mm. 7-8 in
comparison to a similar Gesture 2 at mm. 107-108 (Example 4.11), Gesture 2s at mm. 11-12 and
mm. 109-110 (Example 4.12), and Gesture 2s at Talea 1’s m. 79 and 85 (Example 4.13). In all
cases, Gesture 2s also bear resemblance to each other.
In Example 4.11, the Gesture 2 at mm. 107-108 very closely mirrors the ‘model’ at mm.
7-8 with a descending contour, decrescendo, pitch order position-numbers, and elongation of the
penultimate chord. The rhythmic attacks, however, are shifted over by one ‘beat,’ and the
instrumentation is altered.
Example 4.11 Gesture 2 ‘model’ at mm. 7-8 compared to Gesture 2 at mm. 107-108. Gesture 2
typically descends, with a decrescendo and elongation on the penultimate attack.
126
In Example 4.12, the contour of the Gesture 2 ‘model’ is varied, yet the emphasis on the
penultimate attack remains. Talea 2’s 11-12 and mm. 109-110 also mimic each other.
Articulation is added to the penultimate chord. The instrumentation and pitch order position-
numbers are also similar. Gesture 2 at mm. 109-110 is shifted earlier by one ‘beat’ in the
rhythmic pattern.
Example 4.12 Gesture 2 at mm. 11-12 compared to Gesture 2 at mm. 109-110. Both Gesture 2s
retain the falling contour and decrescendo toward the end of the phrase as well as the elongation
of the penultimate attack.
Gesture 2s at Talea 1’s m. 79 and m. 85 (Example 4.13) also differ in contour from the
‘model’ and preserve the penultimate attack elongation. (The chords associated with pitch order
127
position-number 9 actually belong to Gesture 3.) The Gesture 2s also mirror each other by
occurring over the same rhythmic ‘beats’ and containing similar pitch order position-numbers.
Example 4.13 Gesture 2 at m. 79 compared to Gesture 2 at m. 85. Gesture 2 again includes an

elongation of the penultimate attack, decrescendo, and a descending contour.
4.6 Gesture 3
The third gesture ‘model’ can be characterized by its zigzag contour, rhythmic
diminution, and emphatic personality, as in Talea 2’s mm. 19-20 ‘model’ (Example 4.14).
Unlike the first and second gestures, which are introduced by the winds, the third gesture begins
in the piano. Its manifestations are also expressed with considerable variety and often deviate
from the ‘model.’ Additionally, it tends to be linked with Gesture 1 (Example 4-15).
128
Example 4.14 Gesture 3 ‘model’ at mm. 19-20 compared with Gesture 3 at mm. 22-23. Gesture
3 is characterized by rhythmic diminution, a zigzag contour, and emphatic character. Often, it
appears linked with Gesture 1.
Example 4.15 More Gesture 3s with Gesture 1 ‘links’
a. Gestures 3 + 1 at m. 26
129
b. Gestures 3 + 1 at mm. 44-45
c. Gestures 3 + 1 at m. 111
As we will see, the reason for the Gesture 1 ‘link’ in manifestations of Gesture 3 has to do with
self-similarities within the 12-tone series.
4.7 Self-Similarity within the 12-tone series
The 12-tone series itself contains self-similarity, which creates commonalities among
gestures (Example 4.16). This harkens back to Ligeti’s description of the fourth movement as
“self-similar in everything, e.g. gestures, intervallic shapes.”11 Although there are more perfect
similarities (which do not skip pitch order position-numbers), I include the most relevant ones
which appear ubiquitously in Ligeti’s score – the major seventh chord, the major-minor [0347]
tetrachord, and the dominant seventh chord. By extension, I also allude to their subsets – major
and minor triads as well as the [026] trichord, which are also commonly found.

11
Imagination, 328.
130
Example 4.16 Self-similarities within the 12-tone series
a. The major seventh chord on pitch order position-numbers 4, 5, 6, 7; 8, 10, 11, 12; and 11, 12,
1, 3
b. The [0347] tetrachord on pitch order position-numbers 10, 11, 12, 1; 12, 2, 3, 4; and 2, 4, 5, 6
c. The dominant seventh chord on pitch order position-numbers 9, 10, 11, 12 and 12, 1, 2, 4
With regard to the dominant seventh chord, perhaps the reason it (as Gesture 3) often is
associated with Gesture 1 has to do with the way it maps onto the beginning portion of the 12-
tone series (Example 4.17).
Example 4.17 The mapping of Gesture 3’s pitch order position-numbers 9, 10, 11, 12, 1 à
Gesture 1’s 1, 4, 12, 2, 3
131
The similarities which take the forms of the major seventh chord, [0347] tetrachord, and
dominant seventh chord are significant not only because of their numerous appearances
throughout the movement but also the composer’s use of them as common-tone ‘pivots’ between
prime forms. By ‘pivots,’ I refer to common tones used to move between prime forms similar to
the way Schoenberg used hexachordal combinatoriality to ‘modulate’ between various forms of a
twelve-tone series.
Ligeti’s exploitation of the similarities, however, (1) are limited to prime forms, (2)
emphasizes tonal or quasi-tonal harmonies more akin to Berg, (3) often lacks aggregate
completion by avoiding the presence of all 12 tones, (4) focuses more on repetition, rather than
transformation, and (5) stresses these similarities as melodic units whose pitch order position-
numbers replicate imperfectly at multiple transposition levels.
As we will see, the similarities within the 12-tone series create ambiguity as to how to
distinguish gestures when they contain the same chords. Since the movement is, as Ligeti said,
“self-similar in everything,” we might wonder about the boundaries that distinguish one gesture
from another or, as Hofstadter asked in regard to Escher’s Butterflies, “When are two things the
same?” Ligeti, however, embraced ambiguity, as he once remarked: “Everything that is direct
and unambiguous is alien to me. I love allusions, double-entendres, ambiguities, the double-
bottomed, the cryptic. Ambiguous are also the various pictorial associations with my music,
which I speak or think or sense while I envisage music.”12

12
Nordwall, Ligeti, 138, quoted and translated in Floros, Ligeti, 28.
132
4.8 The Major Seventh Chord
The major seventh chord can be labeled a Gesture 2 on pitch order position-numbers 4, 5,
6, 7 or Gesture 3 hybrids on pitch order position-numbers 8, 10, 11, 12 or 11, 12, 1, 3. Given
that the major seventh chord serves as a commonality between both Gestures 2 and 3, its melodic
manifestation tends to share characteristics of both gestures. For instance, during middle
presentations of the major seventh chord at mm. 54-56, the major seventh chord is expressed
with aspects of Gestures 2 and 3. The major seventh chord unfolds in augmentation (more
closely associated with Gesture 2, given its tendency to elongate the penultimate pitch) and with
the zigzag contour related to Gesture 3 (Example 4.18).
Example 4.18 Major seventh chords at mm. 54-56 with traits of Gesture 2 (augmentation) and
Gesture 3 (zigzag contour)
133
Even when rhythmic augmentation is absent (Example 4.19), diminution is likewise
omitted, as though Gesture 2’s augmentation and Gesture 3’s diminution cancel out one other.
Example 4.19 The major seventh chord at mm. 17-18 with neither Gesture 2’s augmentation or
Gesture 3’s diminution
Upon first perusal of Examples 4.18 and 4.19, the question arises as to why we do not
label all major seventh chords as Gesture 2 but instead, include the possibility of the major
seventh chord’s association with Gesture 3. The reason reveals itself when we investigate the
later part of the movement, in which the major seventh chords begin to resemble Gesture 3 more
than Gesture 2. This is apparent when accounting for the prime forms of phrases with same or
similar instrumentation as well as the increasing tendency for the major seventh chord to be
expressed in Gesture 3’s characteristic rhythmic diminution.
A case of the major seventh chord behaving more like Gesture 3 than 2 occurs at Talea 1’s
m. 83 (Example 4.20). First, the phrase is rhythmically compressed, which we associate more
with Gesture 3 than with Gesture 2. Secondly, labeling the major seventh chord as Gesture 2
134
actually results in skips larger than one pitch order position-number for the entire phrase.
Thirdly, interpreting the major seventh chord as a Gesture 3 hybrid on pitch order position-
numbers 11, 3, 12, 1, followed by 2, 4, and 5 produces no skips. Lastly, we might observe how
the upward contour mimics Gesture 1, suggesting the ‘link’ from Gesture 3 to Gesture 1 (refer
back to Example 4.15).
Example 4.20 Major seventh chord at m. 83 behaving more as Gesture 3 (with diminution) than
Gesture 2
At Talea 1’s m. 103, the major seventh chord likewise occurs in rhythmic diminution and
has a zigzag contour (Example 4.21), hinting at Gesture 3. It is most likely associated with
Gesture 3’s pitch order position-numbers 8, 10, 11, 12, as a continuation of the piano’s prime
form P11 from m. 102.
135
Example 4.21 Major seventh chord at m. 103 behaving more as Gesture 3 (with diminution and
zigzag contour) than Gesture 2
At Talea 1’s mm. 121-122 (Example 4.22), two melodic major seventh chords are labeled
as Gesture 3s on pitch order position-numbers 11, 12, 1, 3 and 8, 10, 11, 12, rather than as two
Gesture 2s. Although we could label mm. 121-122 as two Gesture 2s, this would require us to
switch prime forms from P0/2/5/9 to P4/6/9/1 in mid-phrase. In order to remain within the same
prime form for the entire string phrase, Gesture 3 is given preference over Gesture 2. Again, the
major sevenths are rhythmically compressed and outline zigzag contours, suggesting Gesture 3.
Furthermore, the pitch order position-numbers 11, 12, 1, 13 and 8, 10, 11, 12 replicate at
different transposition levels, as though to emphasize the major seventh chord similarities of the
row.
136
Example 4.22 Major seventh chords at mm. 121-122 expressing Gesture 3 (with diminution and
zigzag contours) rather than Gesture 2
4.9 The Major-Minor Tetrachord [0347]
The [0347] tetrachord can be labeled as a Gesture 3 hybrid on pitch order position-
numbers 10, 11, 12, 1 as well as a Gesture 1 hybrid on pitch order position-numbers 4, 12, 2, 3
(recall Example 4.16). It can also be considered a Gesture 2 on pitch order position-numbers 5,
4, 6, 2, though this variation seems less used in the fourth movement.
As with the major seventh type, the [0347] duality is stressed by expressing the tetrachord
as an amalgamation of two gestures – in this case, Gestures 3 and 1. From its first appearance at
Talea 2’s m. 26 in the piano (Example 4.23), the [0347] tetrachord combines Gesture 3’s
rhythmic diminution with Gesture 1’s rising contour.
137
Example 4.23 Tetrachord [0347] at m. 26 as combining Gesture 1’s rising contour with Gesture
3’s diminution
In Example 4.24, the [0347] tetrachord at m. 26 is placed in context. On the one hand,
the tetrachord at m. 26 is a Gesture 3 on 10, 11, 12, 1, extending pitch order position-numbers 5,
6, 7, 8, 9 from the piano’s P8 at mm. 24-25. On the other hand, it is a Gesture 1 on 4, 12, 2, 3,
preserving the same P8/3 relation from the piano at mm. 24-25.
Example 4.24 Context of tetrachord [0347] at m. 26, showing that it can be analyzed as either
Gesture 3 or Gesture 1
138
In Example 4.25, the [0347] tetrachord in the piccolo/brass/glockenspiel at mm. 119-120
behaves as a ‘pivot’ from Gesture 3’s pitch order position-numbers 11, 12, 1, 10 to Gesture 1’s
12, 2, 3, 4. As Gesture 3, it shares the P10/1 relation with the trumpet/trombone at mm. 118-119
and the bassoon/brass at m. 124. As a Gesture 1, the tetrachord retains not only the P1 connection
with the trumpet/trombone at mm. 118-119 but also anticipates the P8/0 relation with the
flute/oboe/clarinet/trumpet/glockenspiel at mm. 122-123. Additionally, when occurring as
Gesture 1, P1 behaves as a ‘root’ of a muddy major seventh chord, i.e. Bb, D, E, F, A, rather than
as a doubling.
Example 4.25 Tetrachord [0347] at mm. 119-120 as behaving as a ‘pivot’ from Gesture 3’s pitch
order position-numbers 11, 12, 1, 10 à Gesture 1’s 12, 2, 3, 4
139
In Example 4.26, the oboe/clarine/bassoon/horn line at Talea 2’s mm. 125-126 similarly
evokes the [0347] duality. The [0347] tetrachord ‘pivots’ from P3/5/9’s 11, 12, 1, 10, 7 to P10/0/4’s
12, 2, 3, 4, 5. The shift to P10/0/4 also anticipates the beginning of the piano’s upward chordal
ascent at mm. 127-128 on P4 and P0.
Example 4.26 The [0347] tetrachord at mm. 125-126 behaving as a ‘pivot’ with Gesture 3’s
pitch order position-numbers 10, 11, 12, 1 à Gesture 1’s 12, 2, 3, 4
4.10 The Dominant Seventh Chord
The dominant seventh chord appears primarily as Gesture 3 on pitch order position-
numbers 9, 10, 11, 12, though it can also occur as Gesture 1 on pitch order position-numbers 12,
1, 2, 4, often in the form of a ‘pivot’ (refer back to Example 4.16). In Example 4.27, analyzed as
140
Gesture 3, the prime form with the ‘root’ is P5 with a doubling at the interval of the fifth. If
interpreted as Gesture 1, the ‘root’ prime form is P0 (with the same doubling).
Example 4.27 The dominant seventh chord as a ‘pivot’ at m. 105 from Gesture 3’s pitch order
position-numbers 9, 10, 11, 12 à Gesture 1’s 12, 1, 2, 4
Placed in context, the dominant seventh chord in m. 105 straddles both P0 and P5 realms. P0 and
P5 relate to the piano’s later statement at m. 106 (Example 4.28), which presents two more
dominant seventh chords and likewise inhabits both prime forms.
Example 4.28 Dominant seventh chords at mm. 106-107 behaving as Gesture 3
141
The ‘roots’ of these harmonies (G, C#, E, A, C, F, Ab, C#, Bb, D, G, G) refer to P0 with a
doubling of [2]. The * to the left of *3 and *8 denote deviations in the P10 doubling, which
should be Eb and Gb to preserve the [2] relation with P0. I also label the doubling P(10) with
parentheses to show that it is imperfectly expressed.
Moreover, the dominant seventh begins to replicate imperfectly at P5. In this case, the
pitch order position-numbers *10 and *11 signify the ‘errors’ or deviations, given that the notes
should be F# and A to preserve the [2] doubling. Although interpreted differently than P0/(10), in
which case, the [2] relation was Eb-F and Gb-Ab, rather than E-F# and G-A, the pitch order
position-numbers 9, *10, *11 create a more meaningful connection, since it duplicates order
position-numbers previously stated. Lastly, as will be revealed in Subsection 4.11, this 9, 10, 11,
12, 1, 3, 8 unit is crucial to the fourth movement and occurs repeatedly toward the end of the
piece.
The dominant seventh chord is also found as Gesture 1 in fragmented fashion on pitch
order position-numbers 1, 2, 4. In these cases, the [026] fragment (subset of the dominant
seventh chord) tends to emphasize Gesture 1 with its rising contour, such as in the bassoon/horn
at Talea 1’s mm. 72-73 in Example 4.29.
142
Example 4.29 The dominant seventh chord at mm. 71-72 behaving as Gesture 3 (with zigzag
contour) and the [026] fragment at mm. 72-73 interpreted as Gesture 1 (with a rising contour)
The bassoon/horn phrase at mm. 72-73 can be seen as Gesture 1, re-interpreting Gesture 3 at
mm. 71-72 in the flute/clarinet. The contours of these phrases also suggest a re-interpretation of
gesture. The shared prime form is P10, which also appears in the piano’s chords at mm. 71-73.
At Talea 1’s mm. 84-85, the [026] fragment again mimics Gesture 1. The ‘roots’ of the
quasi-dominant seventh chords are E, F#, and Bb on P4 (if interpreted as Gesture 1) or P9 (if
analyzed as Gesture 3). P9 is encompassed in the subsequent piano phrase at mm. 85-86
(Example 4.30).
143
Example 4.30 The [026] fragment at m. 84 interpreted as Gesture 1 (on P4) and Gesture 3 (on
P9 )
P4 also appears in the brass notes (trombone followed by trumpet) as pitch order position-
numbers 3, 5, 6, 7 at mm. 86-87 (Example 4.31), as though returning to pitch order position-
number 3 to fill in the ‘gap’ from 1, 2, 4 at mm. 84-85.
Example 4.31 The brass notes at mm. 86-87 filling in the ‘gap’ by beginning with P4’s pitch
order position-number 3 and continuing with 5, 6, 7
At mm. 89-90, the [026] fragment again refers to Gestures 1 and 3, though is closer in
character, contour, and continuation (since it extends to pitch order position-number 5) to
Gesture 1. The roots of the minor-major seventh chords are C, D, Gb, and Eb occur in P0 (if
labeled as Gesture 1) or P5 (if considered Gesture 3). Both P0 and P5 appear in the subsequent
144
string phrase at mm. 90-91 (Example 4.32). The notes in P0 highlight roots of minor-major
seventh chords, while the pitches in P5 occur as roots of dominant seventh chords.
Example 4.32 The [026] fragment at mm. 89-90 interpreted as Gesture 1 (on P0) and Gesture 3
(on P5)
At Talea 2’s m. 139 (Example 4.33), the flute/oboe/clarinet/horn phrase again stresses the duality
of the [026] fragment. As Gesture 3, the roots of the dominant seventh chords unfold in P0. As
Gesture 1, those roots occur in P7. Referring to Talea 2’s full series at mm. 135-141, the two
prime forms appearing there are P0 and P7.
145
Example 4.33 The [026] fragment at m. 139 interpreted as Gesture 1 (on P7) and Gesture 3 (on
P0 )
Thus, the similarities within the 12-tone series on the major seventh chord, the [0347] tetrachord,
and the dominant seventh chord bring out commonalities among gestures and prime forms. This
creates not only a sense of cohesion but also a sense of ambiguity.
146
4.11 Melodic Fractals
Generally, self-similarity occurs with the simultaneous diminution and augmentation of
similar shapes. However, there are also cases in which the same phrase contains two gestures
unfolding at different speeds. Such cases are infrequent, however, and their appearances occur
without consistency or pattern.
In Example 4.34, mm. 19-20, the piano can be interpreted as expressing both Gesture 3
and Gesture 1. Whereas the rhythmically compressed pitches outline Gesture 3, the accented
ones convey Gesture 1 on pitch order position-numbers 4, 3, 2. At mm. 22-23, the piano again
articulates Gesture 3, though also stresses Gesture 2 in accented notes on pitch order position-
numbers 4, 5, 6, 7.
Example 4.34 Melodic fractals at mm. 19-23
In Example 4.35, there is an amalgamation of Gesture 3 and two Gesture 2s. The notes in
diminution first occur as Gesture 3 (on pitch order position-numbers 9, 10, 11, 12) before
articulating Gesture 2 (on pitch order position-numbers 4, 5, *6, 7, 8 in a different prime form).
At the same time, a slower Gesture 2 unfolds on the accented notes as 4, 5, *6, 7, 8.
Furthermore, the placement of the deviation on pitch order-position number 6 is preserved in
both Gesture 2’s rhythmically compressed and accented versions.
147
Example 4.35 Melodic fractals at m. 105
In Example 4.36, Gesture 3 is mixed together with itself. The duplication occurs not only
in the rhythmically compressed pitches, as evident in the repeating pitch order position-numbers
9, 10, 11, but also in the accented notes. In this case, the notes of the L.H. (G, C#, Ab, Bb, G)
outline a third Gesture 3 in P0 on pitch order position-numbers 9, 10, 8, 7, 9.
In Example 4.37, there are various gestures in rhythmic diminution as well as Gesture 3
in the L.H.’s accented top notes, Bb, A, D, A, Gb, D, F#, G#, F, D, C#. The L.H. notes can be
interpreted as P1 on pitch order position-numbers 12, 8, 10, 8, 3, 10, 3, 9, 11, 10, 1. As we will
148
find, these accented pitches form an unordered version of 9, 10, 11, 12, 1, 3, 8, which are also
present in Examples 4.36 and 4.38 and will be discussed in Subsection 4.12.
In Example 4.38, various gestures in diminution are combined with slower moving G3
and G2. This is clear when examining the accented notes in the double bass at m. 123 and mm.
124-125. In both phrases, the accented double bass notes belong to P10. At m. 123, the double
bass notes G, Bb, D correspond to pitch order position-numbers 12, 1, 11 (a Gesture 3). At mm.
124-125, the notes E, C#, A refer to pitch order position-numbers 4, 5, 6 (a Gesture 2).
Example 4.38 Melodic fractals (double bass) at mm. 123-126
149
The 9-10-11-12 Unit
4.12 Chaos Aspect 1 – Juxtaposition of Order and Disorder: Secret Order revealed in the
Long-Term
Similar to a concealed order being unveiled as a long-term result of a chaotic process, full
statements of the 12-tone series emerge only toward the end of the movement, as shown in
Examples 4.6 and 4.7. This mimics the way the rhythmic pattern manifests itself – as fragments
at the beginning and middle of the movement, and only later, as completely articulated
expressions. These complete statements occur at the most dramatic section of the piece,
beginning with the piano’s chordal build-up at m. 127.
Likewise, the major seventh chord, [0347] tetrachord, and dominant seventh chord
actually function as fragments of a larger unit based on pitch order position-numbers 8, 9, 10, 11,
12, 1, 3, which is usually expressed in the following order 9, 10, 11, 12, 1, 3, 8 (recall Example
4.36 at mm. 106-107, Example 4.15c at m. 111, Example 4.37’s accented notes at mm. 117-120,
and Example 4.38 at mm. 124-125). I will henceforth refer to this 9, 10, 11, 12, 1, 3, 8 grouping
as the 9-10-11-12 unit. It is significant because it is stressed with increasing frequency toward
the end of the movement and stated overtly at least 17 times (Table 4.1).
Table 4.1 List of overt 9-10-11-12 unit appearances in the fourth movement
1. Talea 2, mm. 106-107
2. Talea 1, m. 111
3. Talea 2, mm. 115-116
4. Talea 2, mm. 124-125
5. Talea 2, mm. 128-130 (split between instruments)
6. Talea 1, m. 129 (split between instruments)
7. Talea 2, m. 132
8. Talea 2, mm. 133-134
9. Talea 2, mm. 135-136 (as diminution)
10. Talea 2, mm. 135-136 (in full series)
11. Talea 2, mm. 136-137
12. Talea 1, mm. 137-138
13. Talea 1, mm. 138-139
14. Talea 1, m. 140 (split between instruments, out of order)
15. Talea 2, m. 140 (split between instruments)
150
16. Talea 2, mm. 140-141 (in full series)
17. Talea 1, m. 141
During beginning and middle sections, most presentations of the 9-10-11-12 unit are
fragmented, taking the form of isolated major seventh chords, [0347] tetrachords, and dominant
seventh chords. These occurrences happen randomly, as no discernable pattern can be found in
the rotation or order of these melodic fragments. In this way, Chaos Aspect 1 is again expressed,
with an unpredictable surface hiding a secret order (the 9-10-11-12 unit) that eventually
emphatically reveals, as we will see, certain similarities in the 12-tone series.
Among these similarities is the all-combinatorial [014589] hexachord or 6-20 on pitch
order position-numbers 8, 10, 11, 12, 1, 3, which is embedded in the 9-10-11-12 unit. However,
given Ligeti drew only upon prime forms of the series, the ‘all-combinatorial’ property is less
important than its self-similar and quasi-tonal potential. When mapped to the 12-tone series, the
unit skips pitch order position-numbers, as apparent in Example 4.39.
Example 4.39 The [014589] hexachord in the 12-tone series and its tonal fragments
151
Additionally, although the [014589] hexachord can unfold upon pitch order position-
numbers 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, this variation is less common, given that the hexachord generally is
contained within the 9-10-11-12 unit. Moreover, the [014589] hexachord can be arranged into
self-similar divisions of [014], which also has strong quasi-tonal implications with its inclusion
of both major and minor thirds (Example 4.40).
Example 4.40 The [014589] hexachord as constructed from smaller self-similar units [014]
We can trace the evolution of the 9-10-11-12 unit by examining its earlier appearances as
hidden or partial melodic statements. Starting at Talea 1’s mm. 80-81(Example 4.41), the unit is
hidden and unordered. At Talea 1’s 99-100 (Example 4.42), the unit is also unordered and is
missing pitch order position-number 9. At Talea 2’s mm. 106-107 (Example 4.43), the unit
contains deviations (as was discussed in Example 4.36). At Talea 1’s m. 111 (Example 4.44), the
unit’s first obvious statement emerges. In all cases, I include the three possible transposition
levels of the [014589] hexachord on pitch order position-numbers 8, 10, 11, 12, 1, 3. I also mark
9-10-11-12 units and [014589] hexachords in brackets.
152
Example 4.41 The 9-10-11-12 unit at mm. 80-81 as hidden and unordered
Example 4.42 The 9-10-11-12 unit at mm. 99-100 as unordered and missing pitch order
position-number 9
Example 4.43 The 9-10-11-12 unit at mm. 106-107 as containing deviations
153
Example 4.44 The 9-10-11-12 unit’s first obvious statement at m. 111
After Talea 1’s m. 111, most expressions of the 9-10-11-12 unit are clearly stated, such as
at Talea 2’s m. 115-116, Talea 2’s m. 132, and Talea 1’s mm. 137-139 (Example 4.45).
Example 4.45 Clear Statements of the 9-10-11-12 unit
a. The 9-10-11-12 unit at mm. 115-116
b. The 9-10-11-12 unit at m. 132
154
c. The 9-10-11-12 unit at mm. 137-139
Additionally, the 9-10-11-12 unit is sometimes split between instruments, such as at Talea 2’s
mm. 128-130, Talea 1’s m. 129, and Talea 2’s m. 140 Example 4.46).
Example 4.46 The 9-10-11-12 unit as split between instruments
a. The 9-10-11-12 unit at mm. 127-129
b. The 9-10-11-12 unit at mm. 129-130
155
c. The 9-10-11-12 unit at m. 140
Therefore, Chaos Aspect 1 can be seen in the evolution of the 9-10-11-12 unit’s
emergence from unpredictable, fragmented manifestations to ordered, full presentations. Earlier
manifestations of the 9-10-11-12 unit as major seventh chords, [0347] tetrachords, and dominant
seventh chords only hint at this underlying unit. The occurrences at Talea 1’s mm. 80-81
(Example 4.41) and mm. 99-100 (Example 4.42) begin showing signs of the 9-10-11-12 unit’s
emergence. By Talea 2’s mm. 106-107 (Example 4.43), the unit has begun to multiply. By the
climactic section of the piece (starting at m. 127), the unit seems to have ‘activated’ and
proliferates uncontrollably, appearing almost every measure in quasi-periodic fashion (Examples
4.45 and 4.46).
4.13 Fractal Aspect 4 - Iteration
We might also observe that due to the properties of the [014589] hexachord, duplication
of certain pitch order position-numbers occurs in manifestations of the 9-10-11-12 unit on three
transposition levels. These replications of pitch order position-numbers are clear from
examining Example 4.45. First, we take the prime form containing the unit’s pitch order
position-number 9 as a starting point. Although not a perfect analogy, this is similar to z(0), the
156
starting point of a recursive function (recall Chapter 2, Subsection 2.5). As a ‘first iteration’ or
z(1), we transpose [-4] from the first prime form. This results in a replication of four pitch order
position-numbers 10, 11, 12, 1 in the second prime form. As a ‘second iteration’ or z(2), we again
transpose by [-4]. This similarly produces a duplication of four pitch order position-numbers,
this time 3, 8, 10, and 11 in the third prime form. In this way, the 9-10-11-12 unit shares an
affinity with Fractal Aspect 4 by involving iterative processes and results.
Error Amplification
4.14 Chaos Aspect 2 – the Butterfly Effect – and Gödel’s theorem of Inconsistency and
Incompleteness
The butterfly effect occurs most predominantly in the coda of the piece, as though the
dramatic disturbance from this climactic section was so severe that the system can never recover.
This is another one of Ligeti’s innovative ideas, besides his use of the rhythmic pattern which
relates to Chaos Aspect 1 discussed in Chapter 3. Although we find deviations (pitches that
diverge from the 12-tone series, marked with a *) earlier in the movement, such as at mm. 106-
107 (refer back to Example 4.43), the number of deviations explode exponentially in the coda.
This is obvious from comparing beginning, middle, and end sections of the reduced score and
observing the presence of * over pitch order position-numbers in the coda (Example 4.47). In
this way, we can relate this sudden “amplification of error” 13 (expressed as increased deviation
from the 12-tone series) to the butterfly effect.

13
Stewart, Nature’s Numbers, 112.
157
Example 4.47 Increased presence of deviations (marked with * and circled) toward the end of
the movement
a. Beginning of the movement containing no deviations
158
b. Middle of the movement as relatively free of deviation
159
160
c. End of the movement as flooded with deviations
161
162
Additionally, we can associate the coda’s combination of completeness plus inconsistency
to Gödel’s theorem (Chapter 2, Subsection 2.14). It seems fitting that the coda (which acts as a
closing or ‘completing’ section, regardless of whether the movement truly sounds ‘complete’)
would demonstrate so much ‘inconsistency.’
Returning to the musically-analogized butterfly effect, unlike at mm. 106-107 (Example
4.43), in which the margin of deviation is only the distance of a semitone, the coda contains
examples whose margins of error start to amplify more drastically. These examples tend to retain
a similar contour to the shape of the phrase that would have been ‘correct,’ which is usually
provided by another instrument with mostly accurate pitch order position-numbers.
At the beginning of the coda, though, deviations still are relatively mild, being only a
semitone off. In Example 4.48, a string passage at Talea 1’s m. 149, the first staff of music
shows the string passage, as it appears in the reduced score. Subsequent staves extract individual
instruments to reveal the details of these deviations.
163
Example 4.48 Mild deviations at m. 149 in Violins 1 and 2
As we can see, the string passage is based on pitch order position-numbers 1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 10, 11,
12. These pitch order position-numbers are stated accurately in P0 in the viola and cello (the
lowest staff). Both Violin I and Violin II, however, contain deviations. Violin I ‘slips’ between
P3 and P4 , while the Violin II jumps between P10 and P11.
164
At Talea 1, m. 150, the double bass is off only a half step, while the oboe and horn veer a
whole step (Example 4.49).
Example 4.49 Mild deviations at m. 150 in the oboe/horn/double bass
165
At Talea 2’s m. 151, the trumpet/trombone (Example 4.50), likewise slides between
transposition levels a semitone apart. The trumpet ‘slips’ between P4 and P3, while the trombone
‘slips’ between P1 and P0.
Example 4.50 Mild deviations at m. 151 in the trumpet/trombone
166
While the Examples 4.48 to 4.50 are only a half or whole step apart, the amount of
distortion increases as the Coda progresses. At Talea 1’s mm. 151-152 (Example 4.51), while the
trumpet has only 1 deviation a whole step off, the trombone diverges wildly from its starting
point.
Example 4.51 Mild deviations in the trumpet and drastic deviations in the trombone at mm. 151-
152
167
The deviations in the horn at Talea 1’s m. 153 (Example 4.52) likewise amplify. While
the clarinet bears no errors, playing P4 with pitch order position-numbers 10, 11, 9, 12, 3, the
horn spirals away from its first point of reference.
Example 4.52 Drastic deviations at m. 153 in the horn
We might also observe that these approximations occur more in pitch than in rhythm. As
evident from his sketches, Ligeti did not even begin with precise musical notation but instead
with jottings, drawings, charts, and tables, given that “words and pictures mattered almost as
much as music.”14 Additionally, the fourth movement almost always adheres to the rhythmic
pattern, except for mm. 50-51 where the rhythm is ‘imperfect’ (Example 4.53).

14
Bernard, “Rules and Regulation: Lessons from Ligeti’s Compositional Sketches,” 157.
168
Example 4.53 A genuine error at mm. 50-51 in the rhythm
I believe, however, this rhythmic error is a genuine, rather than a deliberate deviation.
The reason is that this is the only time a rhythmic error occurs. If it were intentional, one would
expect the deviation to occur again, as in, for example, other works by Ligeti, such as his first
Piano Etude Désordre (discussed in Chapter 1, Subsection 1.12), or the third movement of the
Horn Trio, in which the violin is offset by one additional sixteenth note at attacks in every other
rhythmic cycle (Table 4.2). Even with the Horn Trio, however, the pattern of rhythmic
displacement was precisely followed while pitch (with the use of the natural horn) was treated
more flexibly. As such, Ligeti’s incorporation of deviation tends to lie more in the realm of pitch
than in rhythm.
169
Table 4.2 Rhythmic chart of Ligeti, Horn Trio, third movement, as containing deliberate
deviations by offsetting the violin by one additional sixteenth note every other cycle (circled)
Thus, the fourth movement’s melodic / motivic aspects can be connected to mathematical
ones. The 12-tone series tends to be presented in an “irregular and very fragmented” way
(Fractal Aspect 1). It displays elements of self-similarity on various levels (Fractal Aspect 2). A
secret melodic order with the 9-10-11-12 unit emerges toward the end (Chaos Aspect 1). This 9-
10-11-12 unit displays characteristics of iteration (Fractal Aspect 4). Lastly, the coda reveals
‘error amplification’ which relates to the butterfly effect (Chaos Aspect 2) and Gödel’s Theorems
of Inconsistency and Incompleteness.
170
Chapter 5: Harmony
Overview of the Harmony
5.1 Surface Harmony as Based on the 12-Tone Series and Two Main Hexachords
In the fourth movement, melodic gestures are often doubled at the fifth, third, triad, or
seventh chord, creating a quasi-tonal shimmer. As seen in Chapter 4, tonal or quasi-tonal
harmonies, such as the major seventh chord, major-minor [0347] tetrachord, the dominant
seventh chord and their subsets, can be derived from the 12-tone series and are emphasized
throughout the movement (Example 5.1).
Example 5.1 Tonal or quasi-tonal harmonies within the 12-tone series
a. The major seventh chord on pitch order position-numbers 4, 5, 6, 7; 8, 10, 11, 12; and 11, 12,
1, 3
b. The [0347] tetrachord on pitch order-position numbers 10, 11, 12, 1; 12, 2, 3, 4; and 2, 4, 5, 6
c. The dominant seventh chord on pitch order-position numbers 9, 10, 11, 12 and 12, 1, 2, 4
171
In particular, such harmonies can be considered fragments of the 9-10-11-12 unit. As we will
see, the 9-10-11-12 unit’s [014589] hexachord (Example 5.2) will be significant at a deeper level
toward the end of the movement.
Example 5.2 The [014589] hexachord within the 9-10-11-12 unit
In addition to deriving the harmony from the 12-tone series, Ligeti used two hexachords
to generate harmonies on the music’s surface. Steinitz wrote: “The building blocks in [the]
fourth movement are conventional…two six-note hexachords comprising all twelve semitones
(although not used serially), from which Ligeti extracts triads like Berg in his Violin Concerto.
But the music evolves in the manner of animated computer fractals, from a simple beginning to a
complex outcome.”1
Steinitz related a similar incorporation of paired hexachords in the first movement’s
piano part, with F, G, A, B, C, D corresponding to the R.H. and C# , D# , E, F#, G# , A# assigned to
the L.H. However, while the first movement’s hexachords were specified, which are actually
prime and inverted forms of the same hexachord 6-33 or [023579], Steinitz did not identify the
fourth movement’s hexachords.
1
172
An important clue into Ligeti's harmonic thinking for the fourth movement can be found
in his sketches. The composer jotted two hexachords in vertical arrangement: Db , Eb , F, G# , A, B
and C, D, E, F# , G, Bb.2 These are prime and inverted forms of the 6-34 hexachord or [013579]
which, like those of the first movement, form an aggregate (Example 5.3a). The 6-34 hexachord
is the most commonly occurring hexachord in the fourth movement. Additionally, it includes all
triads as well as dominant and half-diminished seventh chords. It lacks, on the other hand, major
and minor sevenths, which occur frequently in the movement.
I hypothesize, therefore, that a second hexachord is also harmonically significant – the 6-
32 or [024579] hexachord (Example 5.3b). The 6-32 hexachord is the second most-commonly
appearing hexachord in the fourth movement and clearly alludes to the first six scale degrees of
the major scale.
Example 5.3 Two primary hexachords in the fourth movement
a. 6-34 hexachord [013579], prime and inverted forms
b. 6-32 hexachord [024579] (prime and inverted forms are the same)3
2
Lefresne, “Applications of Chaos Theory and Fractals in Ligeti,” 97.
3
Note that 6-32 is invariant under inversion.
173
In terms of quasi-tonal content, the 6-34 and 6-32 hexachords together comprise all types
of triads and seventh chords, except the fully diminished seventh chord, which generally is not
used in the fourth movement. Figure 5.1 shows inclusion lattices for both 6-34 and 6-32 with
subsets and supersets in bold designating those that are shared between both hexachords. We
might observe that major and minor triads [037] occur in both hexachords. The 6-34 hexachord
also contains diminished [036] triads, augmented [048] triads, minor-major seventh chords
[0148], as well as dominant and half-diminished seventh chords [0258]. The 6-32 hexachord
comprises major [0158] and minor [0358] seventh chords.
174
A
Figure 5.1 Subsets and supersets of A, 6-34 or [013579], and B, 6-32 or [024579].
175
Additionally, the 6-32 hexachord corresponds to the 12-tone pitch series as pitch order
position-numbers 9, 11, 12, 1, 2, 3, including only the elision of 10 (Example 5.4a). Hexachord
6-34, on the other hand, contains more skips. In its prime form, it occurs on pitch order
position-numbers 7, 8, 9, 11, 1, 2 or 11, 12, 1, 2, 4, 7. In inverted form, it appears on pitch order
position-numbers 8, 11, 12, 1, 2, 4 or 7, 9, 11, 1, 2, 4 (Example 5.4b). In Appendix A, the
reduced score, both hexachords and their pentachordal subsets are indicated in green bold.
Example 5.4 Primary hexachords in the 12-tone series
a. 6-32 in the 12-Tone Series
b. 6-34 in the 12-Tone Series
5.2 Surface Harmony as Subsets or Supersets of the 2 Main Hexachords
Almost all “harmonic mixture formations”4 on the surface of the fourth movement are
subsets or supersets of the 6-34 or 6-32 hexachords. As we will see, the way in which Ligeti
incorporated such harmonic conglomerates was similar to his treatment of the rhythm and
4
176
melody / motive – by starting with smaller bits and building to larger ones (see Subsections 5.7
and 5.8 on Fractal Aspect 3).
The simplest type of doubling involves the dyad. Throughout the movement, the
incorporation of this smallest subset appears prominently as dyad strings, a succession of 2 or
more dyads in parallel motion, with those dyads being exactly the same and moving
independently of a larger harmonic conglomerate. For example, the first three dyad strings are
the initial appearances of the main three gestures (Example 5.5).
Example 5.5 The first three dyads as initial appearances of Gestures 1-3
a. [7] Dyad string as Gesture 1 at m. 1
b. [4] Dyad string as Gesture 2 at mm. 7-8
c. [9] and [8] Dyad strings as Gesture 3 at mm. 19-20
177
On the musical surface, the introduction of dyad strings appears deliberate, in that almost
all of them are sprinkled across the first half of the movement rather than exhausted at the very
beginning. By the midway point of the movement, the music has rotated through the majority of
dyads. Table 5.1 lists the first appearances of dyad strings in chronological order.
Table 5.1 Dyad strings in the fourth movement
Talea # Supercycle # Cycle # Measure # Dyad

1 1 1 1 [7]
2 2 4 7 [4]
2 4 10 19 [9], [8]
2 5 13 26 [5]
1 8 29 43 [3]
1 9 34 51 [6]
1 12 48 71 [10]
1 15 57 85 [2]
1 (24 93 140 [1] )
We can observe that new dyad strings seem to be introduced close to sectional markers:
fourths and thirds (and their inversions) occur within the first 43 measures, which is close to the
G.P. at m. 42, tritone dyads appear shortly before the ‘return’ at m. 65, while seconds (and their
inversions) occur shortly after the ‘recapitulation.’ Dyad [1] appears briefly in the piano at Talea
1’s m. 140 for only 2 chords, so most likely does not count as a dyad string, which usually
occurs for entire phrases. Dyad [11] does not make an appearance as a dyad string.
Whereas the more consonant intervals receive an early introduction and remain a
constant presence throughout the movement, the more dissonant intervals appear later. In the
coda of the movement (mm. 151-154), all types of dyads occur, haphazardly mixed with other
harmonic conglomerates, suggesting that the music has reached a point of maximum intervallic
saturation.
178
Additionally, as dyad strings, the intervals appearing most frequently consist of the major
third [4] and the perfect fifth [7] (along with their inversions). The minor third [3] and major
second [2] (and their inversions) occur as the next most frequent dyad strings. The tritone [6]
appears as the least frequent dyad string, while the major seventh [11] (along with its inversion)
does not make a definite appearance.
Evidently, the most commonly appearing dyads, the [4] and [7], have strong tonal
associations, as together, they create the triad and commonly serve as intervallic links between
two key areas in traditional tonal music. In the fourth movement, the significance of intervals
[4] and [7] is reinforced in the relation between prime forms of the 12-tone series. When
multiple prime forms exist in close temporal proximity or unfold simultaneously, they are often
[4] or [7] apart. As we will see, prime forms a [4] or [7] apart tend to have ‘closer’ relationships
because they share several common tones.
When referring to the climactic section of the piece at the piano’s build-up at mm. 127-
141 (Example 5.6), the solo piano rotates through all 12 prime forms of the pitch series. If we
were to divide these prime forms into groups of three, we find that members within each group
of three relate to each other by -[4], while the last member of a group can connect to the first
member of the next group by +[7]:
P4 / P0 / P8
P3 / P11 / P7
P2 / P10 / P6
P1 / P9 / P5
Back to P0
179
Example 5.6 Piano’s full series build-up at mm. 127-141
180
Additionally, full series in Talea 2 at mm. 130-144 (Example 5.7) likewise reflects the
importance of [4] and [7]. The first occurrence P8 at mm. 130-133 is harmonized first as major
seventh chords [0158], then as major triads [037], and is presented out of order. The second full
series P0 at mm. 133-139 is harmonized as septachords [012468T], major triads [037],
tetrachords [0257], and fifths. The third and fourth complete series, P7 and P3 respectively, at
mm. 139-141 and mm. 141-144 are stated more plainly, with the presentations sometimes
doubled as fifths and the series occurring in mostly consecutive order. Not only do
harmonizations of complete pitch series contain intervals of [4] or [7], but the prime forms again
relate to each other by [4] and [7]:
P8 / P0
P7 / P3
181
Example 5.7 Full series at mm. 130-144
182
Returning to the topic of the two main hexachords, it is useful to consider their ic vectors.
The ic vector of hexachord 6-34 is 142422, with both [2] and [4] as the most common intervals.
The ic vector of hexachord 6-32 is 143250, with the most common interval as [5]. This suggests
a strong correlation between the primary intervals of the 6-34 and 6-32 hexachords and the
primary intervals [4] and [7] incorporated throughout the movement.
Moving onto trichords, tetrachords, pentachords, septachords, and octachords, we can
refer back to 6-34 and 6-32’s inclusion lattices in Figure 5.1. The most common trichords in the
fourth movenet are 3-11 [037] and 3-7 [025], which are subsets of both 6-34 and 6-32
hexachords. Likewise, the most common tetrachords – the major seventh 4-20 [0158], the half-
diminished or dominant seventh 4-27 [0258], the minor seventh 4-26 [0358], and four notes of a
major or minor scale 4-22 [0247] – can all be found in either the 6-34 or 6-32 hexachords or, in
the case of [0247], shared in both. Likewise, the most common pentachords 5-27 [01358] and 5-
35 [02479] are both subsets of 6-32.
Septachords and octachords are quite rare. However, the most common septachord 7-33
[012468T] and octachord 8-21 [0123468T] include hexachord 6-34. One can therefore appreciate
the many ways in which Ligeti’s “harmonic mixture-formations” can trace back to the two main
hexachords 6-34 and 6-32.
5.3 Deep-Level Harmony as Consisting of the 12-Tone Series’ Prime Forms
The deep-level harmony can be understood as consisting of prime forms which function
similarly to traditional key areas. Given that phrases are typically doubled as two or more
parallel strands, it is important to distinguish which prime forms operate at a deep harmonic
level from those appearing only on the surface. This is particularly crucial toward the end of the
183
movement, where a phrase might be doubled as parallel pentachords, hexachords, septachords,
or octachords, meaning that five to eight prime forms simultaneously unfold. Additionally, such
phrases are often layered on top of other phrases, which could similarly contain large doublings
(Example 5.8).
Example 5.8 Phrases with large doublings (i.e. pentachords, hexachords, septachords, and
octachords) at mm. 123-129. Only P10 and P5 (circled) operate on a deep harmonic level,
whereas other prime forms behave as surface doublings.
184
185
In Example 5.8, despite the presence of numerous prime forms, the context suggests that
the overall harmony in the orchestra is P10 and P5, which appear in almost every single phrase.
For large-scale harmonic analysis, discussed in Subsections 5.5, 5.6, and 5.9, I will count only
prime forms that operate at a deep level and exclude those on the surface.
Besides considering the overall context, I also consider criteria such as dynamics,
instrumentation, and register, whose details are too cumbersome to show in the reduced score
(Appendix A). In particular, I have noticed a pattern throughout the majority of the movement in
which the lowest strand of a phrase is stressed over others, as implied by a louder dynamic
and/or instrumentation (Example 5.9).
Example 5.9 The lowest strand as expressed as the loudest
a. The bassoon and horn at mm. 89-90 playing the lowest and loudest line
186
b. The same location (mm. 89-90) in the reduced score with P5 or P10 as harmonically significant
on a deeper level
In Example 5.9a, the lowest instruments (the bassoon and horn) have the loudest line, as
suggested by the instrumental doubling. The flute, oboe, clarinet, and trumpet, on the other
hand, could be considered doublings. Example 5.9b shows prime forms P5 or P10 corresponding
to the bassoon/horn line. These prime forms seem to hold deeper harmonic significance than the
doublings on P11, P0, P3, P7, P4, P8, and P0.
The importance of distinguishing deep-level prime forms from their doublings becomes
increasingly apparent toward the end, particularly during full pitch series cycles at mm. 130-144
(recall Example 5.7). At mm. 130-133, P7, P3, and P0 double P8. At mm. 133-138, P11, P10, P8,
P6, P4, P2, P7, and P5 double P0. At mm. 139-141, P2 doubles P7. At mm. 141-143, P10 and P8
double P3. Rather than including all these prime forms as ‘significant,’ I count only the full
series P8, P0, P7, and P3 as deep-level harmony at mm. 130-144. Again, these deep-level prime
forms tend to occur in the lowest register. At mm. 130-144, these prime forms appear in the
double bass. Measures 130-144 will also be revisited in Subsection 5.5, which reveals an even
deeper significance in connection to the [014589] hexachord.
187
5.4 Interaction and ‘Pivots’ Between Prime Forms
Movement from one prime form to another occurs through the use of common tones.
This is a way one might emphasize segmental invariance among series forms, in this case,
preserving certain intervals under transposition. Here, we might recall Hofstadter’s comments
about Escher’s Butterflies in which shapes have “some invariant feature in them, despite the
many ways they differ.”5 Again, we might contemplate how such observations might have
appealed to Ligeti. Evidently, common-tone modulation and segmental invariance are ingrained
in traditional tonal and post-tonal6 compositional techniques, though their kinship with
mathematical self-similarity (Fractal Aspect 2) might have sparked creative inspiration.
In the fourth movement of Ligeti’s Piano Concerto, the invariance among prime forms
suggest a ‘closer’ relationship between prime forms ‘pivoting’ a [2], [4], [6], or [7], apart
(Example 5.10).
5
Hofstadter, Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Brain (New York: Basic Books, 1979), 156.
6
See Straus, Introduction to Post-Tonal Analysis, 217-21, on derivation in Webern’s Concerto for Nine
Instruments for an extreme example of invariance.
188
Example 5.10: Segmental invariance among prime forms a [2], [4], [6], or [7] apart
a. Common ‘pivots’ over the major seventh chord, dominant seventh chord, [0347] tetrachord, and
Gesture 2 mapping (4, 5, 6, 7, 8 à 1, 12, 3, 11, 2) and Gesture 3 mapping (9, 10, 11, 12, 1 à 1,
4, 12, 2, 3)
189
b. ‘Pivoting’ over the [014589] hexachord
Example 5.10 shows the most common types of ‘pivots’ found in the fourth movement.
These include the major seventh chord, the dominant seventh chord, the [0347] tetrachord, a
Gesture 2 mapping of pitch order position-numbers 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 à 1, 12, 3, 11, 2, a Gesture 3
mapping of pitch order position-numbers 9, 10, 11, 12, 1 à 1, 4, 12, 2, 3 (Example 5.10a) as
well as the [014589] hexachord (Example 5.10b).
To clarify the ways in which prime forms ‘pivot,’ let us examine Examples 5.11 to 5.16.
In Example 5.11, P1/8 ‘pivots’ to P4. At Talea 2’s m. 26 (Phrase 1), the piano expresses P1/8 on
pitch order position-numbers 10, 11, 12, 1. At Talea 1’s m. 27, the piano repeats the same phrase
(Phrase 2), though adds an extra attack, articulating P1/8’s pitch order position-numbers 10, 11,
190
12, 1, 3. This second phrase can be re-interpreted as P9/4 on pitch order position-numbers 3, 8,
10, 11, 12. This is because it is a fragment of the [014589] hexachord, which we saw in
Example 5.10b can act as a ‘pivot’ between prime forms a [4] apart.
Thus, the second phrase behaves as a ‘pivot’ to P4. Although the second phrase could
also ‘pivot’ to P9, it does not, suggesting that P9 behaves more as a coloring than as a
harmonically functioning prime form. P4 is confirmed by m. 27’s piano chord on pitch order
position-numbers 1, 2, 3, 9, 12 and the string chord on 1, 2, 11, 9, 12. P4 is likewise reinforced
at m. 28 in the trombone, where it appears as the loudest and lowest prime form on pitch order
position-numbers 1, 2, 3, 4.
Example 5.11 Piano at mm. 26-28 (P1/8 à P4)
191
In Examples 5.12 to 5.16, we can trace a series of ‘pivots’ to demonstrate how the music
moves through several prime forms. As in Example 5.12, the pattern of pairing similar phrases
is again presented. While the first phrase is expressed in a straightforward manner, the second
phrase has an additional attack and is re-interpreted as a ‘pivot.’
Example 5.12 mm. 51-53, similar-phrase pairing (P10 à P4)
Phrase 1 occurs at m. 51, and Phrase 2 appears at mm. 52-53. The first phrase is stated with the
simplest interpretation of P10/4 on 5, 6, 7, 8, while the second is re-interpreted as P4/10 on 1, 12, 3,
11, 2. This ‘pivot’ takes advantage of the Gesture 2 mapping 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 à 1, 12, 3, 11, 2 of
prime forms a [6] apart (refer back to Example 5.10a).
At this point, it is useful to examine where the harmony is going. At mm. 55-56
(Example 5.13), the ambiguous melodic major seventh chord makes an appearance.
192
Example 5.13 mm. 55-56, major seventh chord (P4 confirmed)
As discussed in Chapter 4, Subsection 4.8, the melodic major seventh chord can be interpreted
three different ways. P1/4 on pitch order position-numbers 7, 5, 4, 6, however, provides the
simplest interpretation since it does not omit order position-numbers. This suggests that at mm.
51-53 in Example 5.12, the ‘pivot’ occurs from P10 à P4 rather than P4 à P10. One might argue,
on the other hand, that Example 5.13’s third line of interpretation (with P7/10’s 11, 12, 1, 3)
continues P10 from mm. 51-53 and that mm. 51-56 all express P10.
However, when proceeding, we find that the major seventh chord at mm. 55-56 is itself
part of another pairing of similar phrases. At mm. 57-58 (Example 5.14), the major seventh
chord repeats imperfectly in the piano. Thus, mm. 55-56 contain a first phrase that is stated in a
forthright manner, while mm. 57-58 present the second phrase that is re-interpreted to function
as a ‘pivot.’ This means the major seventh chord at mm. 55-56 is best considered a continuation
of P4 on pitch order position-numbers 7, 5, 4, 6, rather than P10 on 11, 12, 1, 3.
193
Example 5.14 mm. 57-59 (P4 à P6 à P1)
Since the piano’s melodic major seventh at mm. 57-58 functions as a ‘pivot,’ we must
determine where it moves harmonically. Moving forward to the bassoon/trumpet phrase at mm.
57-59, we find P6 in the trumpet on pitch order position-numbers 1, 11, 10, *12. Thus, the piano
‘pivots’ at mm. 57-58 to P6 to facilitate the motion from mm. 55-56’s P4 to mm. 57-59’s P6. P6
continues in the flute at mm. 59-60 and oboe at mm. 60-62 (Example 5.15).
194
Example 5.15 mm. 60-62 (P1 à P9)
We might then wonder how the piano arrives at P1 at mm. 60-61. If we refer back to the
bassoon/trumpet at mm. 57-59 (Example 5.14), we can see that mm. 57-59 also behaves as a
‘pivot’ from P6 to P1. The trumpet line can be re-interpreted as P1’s 3, 12, 4, *2. The piano line
at mm. 60-61 (Example 5.15) therefore continues P1 with pitch order position-numbers 5, 6, 7, 8,
9. Moving forward, P1 continues in the piano until m. 62 at which point it ‘pivots’ to P9 , which
is confirmed at mm. 62-63 as pitch order position-numbers *8, 9, 10 in the trombone and
continued as 5, 7, 8 in the clarinet (Example 5.16). Thus, mm. 51-62 show harmonic motion
from P10 à P4 à P6 à P1 à P9.
195
Example 5.16 mm. 62-63 (P9)
196
The Harmony as “Fractal and Chaotic”
In Subsections 5.5 - 5.9, the harmony will be associated with Fractal Aspects 2 and 3 as
well as Chaos Aspect 1. Similar to Ligeti’s melodic / motivic treatment, his harmonic techniques
are largely traditional. Unlike Ligeti’s rhythmic and melodic / motivic procedures, which
include original uses of a rhythmic pattern and ‘errors’ in the melody / motive, there are no
innovative contributions in Ligeti’s treatment of the harmony. This is perhaps because Ligeti
was more interested in incorporating quasi-tonal harmonies than breaking away from the
traditional past. This quasi-tonal sound, in which tonal harmonies are used non-traditionally, is
typical of Ligeti’s late style.
Fractal Aspect 2 – “Self-Similarity at Multiple Scales”
5.5 The [014589] Hexachord as Sequences of Prime Forms Toward the End of the
Movement
The most striking example of quasi-self-similarity occurs at mm. 127-146 in relation to
the [014589] hexachord. While melodically, the 9-10-11-12 unit occurs repeatedly toward the
end of the fourth movement (Chapter 4, Subsections 4.12 and 4.13), [014589] hexachords on
pitch order position-numbers 8, 10, 11, 12, 1, 3 appear as descending [048] sequences of prime
forms (Example 5.17).
197
Example 5.17 Hexachord [014589] as sequences of prime forms in the piano at mm. 127-146
In Example 5.17, the piano’s prime forms (listed above every note) are re-interpreted as
pitches. These notes can be labeled according to pitch order position-numbers of three prime
forms (listed below every note) containing the [014589] hexachord. Most importantly, these
manifestations of the [014589] hexachord rotate through all twelve prime forms and converge
with the occurrences of full melodic statements of the 12-tone series (recall Chapter 4,
Subsection 4.2). All prime forms are expressed as complete 12-tone cycles, except the first P4 as
well as the last P5, P0, P3, and P9, which are marked in parentheses ( ). Additionally, all prime
forms appear in Talea 1, except for the final P3 and P9, which occur in Talea 2. Lastly, we might
recall the [-4] and [+7] relations between prime forms, as hinted earlier in Subsection 5.2, which
is now more clearly manifest.
In Example 5.18 (also recall Example 5.7), P8, P0, P4, P7, P3, and P9 appear in Talea 2 at
mm. 130-146, which begins in the orchestra and continues into the piano. P9 (appearing in
parentheses) is expressed as an incomplete 12-tone series. Additionally, P4 (also with
198
parentheses) is suggested as a full 9-10-11-12 unit during the P0 full cycle (refer to mm. 135-136
in Example 5.7).
Example 5.18 Talea 2’s prime forms at mm. 130-146
Comparing Examples 5.17 and 5.18, we observe there is an overlap with the piano’s P3
and P9, which show locations where patterns of prime forms based on [014589] hexachords
break away from the sequence. This is similar to composers of traditional tonal music veering
off a circle of fifths to return to the original key. Likewise, at the very end of the movement (m.
154 in Example 5.19), the music returns ‘home’ to P1 despite the absence of a feeling of finality.
Example 5.19 Return to ‘home’ prime form P1 at m. 154
199
5.6 Correspondences Among First Appearances of Prime Forms, the 12-Tone Series, and
the [014589] hexachord
Similarities to the 12-tone series and [014589] hexachord can also be drawn when
examining the first appearances of deep-level prime forms in the movement. These first
appearances tend to be exhausted within the first 13-14 supercycles, as shown in Tables 5.2, 5.3,
and 5.4.
Table 5.2 First appearances of prime forms regardless of talea
Supercycle # Talea # Cycle # Measure # Prime Form P7 – Pitch Harmony

Ord. Pos. #
1 1 1 1 4 [01346]
P1 (C# )
1 2 1 2 P0 (C) 3
2 1 7 10 P9 (A) 2
2 2 6 11 P7 (G) 1
3 1 9 13 P5 (F) 7 [2]
4 1 13 20 8
P3 (Eb)
5 2 13 26 10 [037] (but
P8 (Ab)
also
5 1 18 27 P4 (E) 12 Maj7th)
6 2 16 32 P11 (B) 11
7 1 25 37 6 [048]
P6 (F# )
8 1 29 43 P2 (D) 9
8 2 23 46 5
P10 (Bb)
Table 5.3 Talea 1 – first appearances of prime forms
Supercycle # Cycle # Measure # Prime Form P10 – Pitch Harmony

Ord. Pos. #
1 1 1 5 [048]
P1 (C# )
2 7 10 P9 (A) 6
3 9 13 P5 (F) 9
3 11 17 P7 (G) 12 [0145]
4 13 20 3
P3 (Eb)
5 18 27 7
P8 (Ab)
5 18 27 P4 (E) 4
7 25 37 8 [048]
P6 (F# )
8 29 43 P2 (D) 11
200
8 32 47 1
P10 (Bb)
12 47 70 P0 (C) 2 [1]
14 56 83 P11 (B) 10
Table 5.4 Talea 2 – first appearances of prime forms
Supercycle # Cycle # Measure # Prime Form P7 – Pitch Harmony

Order
Position-#
1 1 2 P0 (C) 3 [014589]
2 6 11 P7 (G) 1 hexachord
4 11 21 8
P3 (Eb)
5 13 26 10
P8 (Ab)
5 14 28 P4 (E) 12
6 16 32 P11 (B) 11
8 23 46 5 [014589]
P10 (Bb)
hexachord
9 25 50 P5 (F) 7
10 29 57 6
P6 (F# )
11 32 64 P9 (A) 2
12 33 65 P2 (D) 9
13 38 76 4
P1 (C# )
In Table 5.2, the first appearances of prime forms regardless of taleae can be interpreted
as expressing a large-scale P7. The first four prime forms unfold over pitch order position-
numbers 4, 3, 2, 1 (an expression of Gesture 1) and outline [0146]. The next two prime forms
break into a dyadic pair on pitch order position-numbers 7-8 (emphasized in Gesture 2 through
an elongation on 7), emphasizing [2]. This is followed by pitch order position-numbers 10, 12,
and 11, which create the major triad [037]. Both [2] and [037] are commonly found throughout
the movement. The remaining three prime forms on pitch order position-numbers 6, 9, and 5,
form an augmented triad [048], which relates to the [014589] hexachord and the tendency to
201
‘pivot’ over [-4], which we found clarified in sequences of prime forms at the end of the
movement (Subsection 5.5).
We also have the presence of the major seventh chord [0158] with pitch order position-
numbers 8, 10, 12, 11. This, along with the first and last groupings, i.e. [0146] and [048], also
relates to the [014589] hexachord. Whereas [0158] and [048] are true subsets of the [014589]
hexachord, [0146] shares subset [014], which duplicates multiple times throughout the
hexachord (Example 5.20). Additionally, [0146] is a subset of the 6-34 hexachord (recall Figure
5.1a).
Example 5.20 Duplications of [014] subsets in the [014589] hexachord
In Table 5.3, the first appearances of prime forms in T1, the prime forms can be
interpreted as expressing a large-scale P10 and subsets of hexachord [014589]. The first and
third groupings, over pitch order position-numbers 5, 6, 9, and 8, 11, 1, form augmented triads
[048]. The second grouping on pitch order position-numbers 12, 3, 7, 4 create [0145]. The last
grouping on pitch order position-numbers 2 and 10 occur [1] apart. In fact, if continuing to
examine significant prime forms, one finds P2 (D) and P3 (Eb) occur next. Together with the
202
previous P0 (C) and P11 (B), we have [0124], which contains [014], again the self-replicating
subset within the [014589] hexachord.
In Table 5.4, the first appearances of prime forms in Talea 2, the prime forms unfold over
P7, as in Table 5.2. Most significantly, the prime forms outline two [014589] hexachords on
pitch order position-numbers 3, 1, 4, 8, 10, 12, 11 and 5, 7, 6, 2, 9, 4.
Thus, the [014589] hexachord in full or fragmented manifestations operates at multiple
levels – within the melodic 9-10-11-12 unit (recall Example 5.2), as ‘pivots’ among prime forms
(Example 5.10b), as interlocking sequences of prime forms (Example 5.17 and 5.18), and as first
appearances of deep-level prime forms (Tables 5.2 to 5.4).
Fractal Aspect 3 – “Simplicity to Complexity” / Space-Filling Tendencies
5.7 Harmony as Demonstrating Space-Filling Tendencies
Similar to the accumulated presentation of rhythmic and melodic ideas, the number of
prime forms within a supercycle increases as the piece progresses. The sense of accumulation
can be found when examining the number of prime forms for Supercycles #1-21, according to
Talea 1, Talea 2, and both Taleae together (Table 5.5).
Table 5.5: Chart of deep-level prime forms for Supercycles #1-21. (Note that “S#” in the
leftmost column refers to Supercycle #.)
S# Talea 1 Harmony Talea 2 Harmony Both Talea Harm

1 C# C C #, C [1]
2 A, C# [4] G, C [5] G, A, C, C# [0146]
3 F, G [2] G F, G [2]
4 Eb C, Eb [3] C, Eb [3]
5 C#, E, Ab [037] Eb, E, Ab [015] C#, Eb, E, Ab [0237]

6 E B E, B [5]
203
7 F #, G [1] G F #, G [1]
8 D, Bb [4] Eb, G, Bb [037] D, Eb, G, Bb [0158]
9 Eb, F, G, Bb [0247] Eb, F, Bb [027] Eb, F, G, Bb [0247]
10 E E, F# [2] E, F# [2]
11 A, C# [4] F#, A, C, D [0258] F#, A, C, C#, D [01258]
12 C, C#, D, E, F#, A [012469] A, C, D, E [0247] C, C#, D, E, F#, A [012469]
13 B b, C # [3] Ab, Bb, C#, D, E [02368] Ab, Bb, C#, D, E [02368]
14 C#, D, F, A [0148] D C#, D, F, A [0148]
15 E b, A [6] E, F [1] Eb, E, F, A [0126]

16 Bb, C, Eb, F, F#, G [012479] Bb, C, D, Eb, E, F, F# [0123468] Bb, C, D, Eb, E, F, F#, [0123479]
G
17 G, Ab, A, B, C# [01246] G, Ab, C# [0167] G, Ab, A, B, C#, D [012467]
18 E, F, F#, Ab, C [01248] F, F#, Ab, A, B, C [013467] E, F, F#, Ab, A, B, C [0124578]
19 G, Ab, B [014] D, F# [4] F#, G, Ab, B, D [01258]
20 Eb, F, F#, A, Bb, B [012568] D, Eb, F, F#, Ab, Bb [013468] D, Eb, F, F#, Ab, A, Bb, [01235689]
B
21 C#, Eb, E, F#, G, Ab, A, Bb [01234679] A, Bb, C, C#, Eb, E, F [0124578] C, C#, Eb, E, F, F#, G, [012345679T]
Ab, A, Bb
In Table 5.5, I include only the first 21 supercycles because all prime forms are present
by Supercycle #22, which coincides with full melodic cycles of the 12-tone series (discussed in
Chapter 4’s Subsection 4.2). I also label each prime form by their first pitch in the 12-tone row.
For example, P9 and P1 in Talea 1, Supercycle #2, are represented as A and C#, respectively, for
the purpose of easily seeing how they fill in harmonic space.
Evidently, the number of prime forms per supercycle increases with time. For instance,
the average number of prime forms at Supercycles #1-11, is less than that of Supercycles #12-21.
204
In this way, the filling-in of harmonic space via prime forms over time is similar to the space-
filling tendencies of the rhythmic pattern and 12-tone series.
5.8 The Combination of Self-Similar Units to Build-up to Larger Ones
Pitch accumulation appears on the harmonic surface as a tendency for smaller, self-
similar intervallic units to combine and form larger ones. At first, smaller units are presented
(i.e. dyads, trichords), before they combine, often with themselves, to create larger
conglomerates. Examples of harmonic accumulation can be found at Talea 1’s mm. 20-21
(Example 5.21), Talea 1’s m. 46 (Example 5.22), Talea 2’s mm. 71-73 (Example 5.23), and Talea
2’s mm. 94-95 (Example 5.24).
In Example 5.21, Talea 1’s mm. 20-21 can be described as an accumulation of [015]. The
first two notes of the melody are doubled at the fifth, a subset within [015]. The next attack is
tetrachord [0156], consisting of two overlapping [015] units – D#-E-G# and its inversion A-G#-E.
The pentachord [01378] expands the units of [015] to inverted forms G-F#-D and D-C#-A.
Example 5.21 Harmonic accumulation of [015] at mm. 20-21
In Example 5.22, Talea 1’s m. 46 accumulates major seconds (or its inversion, the minor
seventh). The first three notes of the phrase are doubled at the minor seventh. The hexachord at
205
the end [023579] appears as a conglomerate of A major and G major triads, a [2] apart. Another
way of interpreting the [023579] hexachord is as a conglomerate of major seconds G-A, B-C# ,
and D-E.
Example 5.22 Harmonic accumulation of [2] or [037] at m. 46
In Example 5.23, Talea 2’s mm. 71-73 very clearly shows how larger units ‘grow’ from
smaller ones. At m. 71, two pairs of trichords [036] form [023589]. At m. 72, the trichord
expands to [037] which, in addition with itself, creates [01358]. The trichord unit is further
enlarged to tetrachord [0358], which similarly combines with itself to produce the main 6-32
hexachord [024579]. At m. 73, the core unit increases to hexachord [024579], which duplicates
with itself to form septachord [0135679], a superset of the 6-34 hexachord. This penultimate
chord of the phrase is the largest, as the last chord [014568] is a combination of the initial
trichord unit [036].
Example 5.23 Harmonic accumulation of self-similar units at mm. 71-73
206
In fact, mm. 71-73 can be interpreted as an expression of the wedge-like character of
Gesture 2, in which the penultimate attack is stressed. Similarly, the entire fourth movement
involves a wedge-like shape, with extreme density, dynamic, articulation, and range occurring
dramatically in the Supercycles #22-24 (recall Chapter 3, Subsection 3.11), which can be
perceived as a ‘penultimate’ section, given the quick tapering-off of intensity at the coda
(Supercycles #25-26).
In Example 5.24, Talea 2’s mm. 94-95 likewise demonstrates the combination of self-
similar to form larger ones. Similar to Example 5.23, the core unit is expanded, mimicking a
wedge, before contracting again. In mm. 94-95, the core unit is [015], which expands to [016],
before decreasing back to [015]. Thus, with this wedge-like shape, Fractal Aspect 3 occurs both
in the deep-level harmony and on the surface harmony.
Example 5.24 Harmonic accumulation of self-similar units at mm. 94-95
5.9 Chaos Aspect 1 – Juxtaposition of Order and Disorder
Similar to the unpredictable manifestations of the hidden rhythmic pattern and the
underlying 12-tone series, the order of prime forms seems to occur randomly throughout the
207
beginning and middle of the fourth movement. It is only until mm. 127-146 in the piano and
mm. 130-146 in the orchestra that prime forms create a discernible pattern in their sequences of
[014589] hexachords. Thus, order is again revealed in the long-term, hidden below the surface,
with the majority of the harmony appearing unpredictably.
Therefore, the harmony shows similarity to the [014589] hexachord and the 12-tone
series on multiple scales (Fractal Aspect 2). It also displays space-filling elements through the
use of deep-level prime forms and local-level harmonic accumulation (Fractal Aspect 3). Lastly,
similar to the rhythmic pattern and 9-10-11-12 unit in the melody / motive, the harmony reveals
a secret order with interlocking sequences of [014589] hexachords (Chaos Aspect 1).
5.10 Conclusion
By considering Ligeti’s mathematical inspiration, an image of a Julia-set fractal (“The
Maelstrom”) as well as its numerous fractal and chaotic associations, we gain insight into the
fourth movement’s musical-mathematical connections. Out of all of these, only two are given
special importance, due to their uniqueness and originality – Ligeti’s incorporation of a secretly-
emerging rhythmic pattern (Chaos Aspect 1, discussed in Chapter 3, Subsection 3.10) and the
proliferation of deviation in the Coda (Chaos Aspect 2, examined in Chapter 4, Subsection 4.14).
However, every musical parameter of the fourth movement can be connected with a “fractal” or
“chaotic” property, even musical techniques that fit within the realms of traditional tonal and
post-tonal music. Thus, this discourse explores the many ways in which the fourth movement
could be perceived as “fractal” and/or “chaotic,” using concepts associated with Ligeti’s
mathematical inspiration.
208
Appendix A:
Reduced score of Ligeti’s Piano Concerto,
fourth movement, analysis
Notes on Nomenclature
For the purposes of readability, the music is split according to talea (abbreviated as “T”)
and presented in the middle staves. Both taleae are included on the outer staves (top and bottom)
to show the rhythmic alignment of the music. Only mm. 127-146 add an extra middle staff that
separates the solo piano (along with its glockenspiel doubling) from the rest of the orchestra.
This is simply due to the lack of space in trying to fit all details at mm. 127-146 onto one staff.
All supercycle and cycle numbers are labeled as well as large-scale form, such as A, A’, coda. In
addition, structural duple and triple ‘beats’ (in rectangular and triangular shapes) mirror the
taleae at a higher level.
All harmonies are condensed and indicated as numbers within brackets [ ]. A horizontal
line following a harmony means that it is sustained for the length of the line. For example, at
Talea 1’s m. 1, the line after [7] denotes that the perfect fifth is sustained for all three chords. At
the beginning of the score, the horizontal brackets under Talea 1’s m. 1 and Talea 2’s mm. 2-3
indicate that the pitches enclosed within the brackets form the harmonies labeled below, i.e.
[02479] and [024579] respectively.
All instrumentation occurring within a phrase is listed at the very beginning of the
passage, even if one or more of the instruments does not play the entire time. Instruments are
abbreviated, without periods to improve readability, and are separated by slashes. Dynamics are
approximated, including only the loudest volume present at the start of a phrase. If there are
differences among articulation pattern within the same phrase, only the articulation pattern that is
present in the majority of instruments is added in the score reduction.
209
In terms of the 12-tone series, only prime forms are used. Slashes, i.e. P1/8, refer to
multiple prime forms of the series appearing at the same time as a way to specify doublings. For
example, in Talea 1’s m. 1, P1/8, shows a doubling at the perfect fifth on prime forms
beginning with Db and Ab on pitch order position-numbers 1, 2, 3 of both series. Parentheses, i.e.
P4/(11), indicate a prime form that is missing or approximating one or more pitch order position-
numbers. P4/(11) means that P4 is completely and accurately expressed, while P11 is imperfectly
presented.
Asterisks * indicate approximations of (1) pitch order position-numbers of notes that
deviate by usually a step or (2) pitch order position-numbers of notes that are missing from at
least one prime form. For example, at Talea 2’s mm. 146-7, P4/(11): *4, 5, 6, 7, 8 should be Bb , G,
Eb , D, C doubled at a fifth with F, D, Bb , A, G. However, the doubling on pitch order position-
number 4 is Bb - E, rather than Bb - F. The relationship between the ‘error’ E and the more
‘correct’ F is a semitone off. Similarly, at Talea 2’s m. 142, piano, P3/(8): 3, *4 indicates another
fifth doubling with Db - Ab and C - G. However, the doubling on pitch order position-number 4 is
missing, as G is absent from P8. For details of exact pitch register, phrase contour, chord
spacing, dynamics of each instrument, slurs, instrumentation, and articulation, refer to Ligeti’s
full score.
210
Appendix A: Reduced score of Ligeti, Piano Concerto, fourth movement, analysis
A
2
Supercycle #1 Supercycle #2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 A Cycle 5
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 23 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 3
& 44 œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ .œ . œ . œ œ . œ . œ . œ œ œ . œ . œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ.
J J J J J J J J JJJ J J J J J J J J JJ J JJ J J J JJ J J JJ J J J J J J J J J
T1 P1 4 5
3 2
P1/8 1 2 3 1 6
ww/hn/rim shot/pizz pno
[7] [016] [014] G.P. G.P.
b œ>. ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑
211
& 44 b b œœ b b œœ ≈ b œ . Ó ‰ # œœ ‰ œ Œ
> > J # œ n # œœ
> >
ƒ ƒ
= [02479]
P0/4 4 5 6 7
P0/7 12 1 2 3
vln picc/trpt
[7] [4]
- - bœ œ œ œ
œ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ -
∑ Ó Œ ∑ ∑ ∑
3 3 3
‰œ
3
& 44
3 3 3
J J ‰ Œ ‰ ‰ # Jœ œ # Jœ œ b œœ œœ # n œœ
3
J J
π G.P. G.P. π p
= [024579]
T2
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4

2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2
4 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
&4
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Cycle 6 Cycle 7 Cycle 8
3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œJ . œJ . œJ œJ œJ . œJ . œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
P9 3
11
T1 12 3 2
P1 7 8 P9 5 10
9 10 P9/1 1 +P7 3 4 1
2 6 8
11 1 12
7 9 P9/11/4 11 12
pno [026] str
[3] ww/br pno ww/br
[015] [01358]
[4] [016] [027]
^´ >j >r j [015]
- # œ ≈ - j
‰ Œ Ó Ó ‰ ≈ # œœ- œœ # œœ ≈ œœ b b œœœ œœœ >
œ Œ
& Œ ‰ # œœ b œœœ
# # œœœ
b œ b œœœ
‰ œ ‰
≈ b b œjœ ≈ b b œœœ ‰ ‰ n # # n œœœœœ
- > RRJ b œ- J >
ƒ ƒ Ï F ƒ
12
f ƒ F
'pivot' ( P5
8
4
212
11
10 )
P0/7 9 7 8 10 11 P7/11 3 4 5 6 7
8
12
str ob/cl/trpt
picc/cl [4]
3
[7] [027]
[7]
j 3 3 3 3 3 j3 j 3
œ ‰‰ j j 3 j j3 Œ Œ ‰‰ j j 3œ œ
& œ
œœ # œœ œœ ‰ ‰ Œ ‰ #œ
œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œœ ‰ ‰
3 3
J - œ œ b œ œœ b b œœ œœ
œ œ #œ œ œœ œœ œœ œœ b œœ œœ b œJ Jœ b b œœ- œœ -
F π f π
p F
T2
Cycle 5 Cycle 6
3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œJ œ œJ œ Jœ œ Jœ œ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
8 9 10 11 12
3
Supercycle #3
Cycle 9 Cycle 10 Cycle 11 Cycle 12
B
3 3 2 3 2 3 3 33 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œJ œJ . œJ . œJ . Jœ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ
J J J JJJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J JJ J J J J J J J
P9 6
T1 7 P5 3 4 P5 10 11
8 10 7
2 5 7
4 1 4
1 6 8
11 12 3
9
2 str 5
cl/str
pno/tamb basco
[013579] [025] [037] [0347] [0237]
[0134]
j j r r -
Œ ≈ n n b œœœ ... www ‰ ≈ # œœœ ˙˙˙ ... ww ˙˙˙˙ ........ ‰
& # # œœœœœœ ‰ Œ w b b b œœœœ .... b n n œœœœ .... œœœœ # # # œœœœ ....
J
> ∏ ∏ >
( P5 11
p π
5
ƒ
213
Melodic Major 7th Chord
10
6 P7/4/11 11 12 1 3
12
9) ( P3/0/7 8 10 11 12 )
( P1/10/5 7 5 4 6)
P7/5/0 8 9 10
picc/cl/hn/ob/trpt
picc/ob/trpt [037] [0358]
[027] 3
3
3 3
& ∑ ∑ Ó Œ ‰ ‰ b jœ jœ œœœ œœœ œœœ b b œœ œœ Ó Œ ‰ ‰ # # œœœ œœ j œ œ œj œœ

œ # œœ œœ n œœ œœ œœ œœ
3 3
-
3
b b œœ œœ J bœ œ J J# œ œ
π- p p P
T2

2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
œ œœ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œ Jœ œ Jœ œ Jœ œ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
13 14 15 16 17 18
Supercycle #4
Cycle 13 Cycle 14 C Cycle 15 Cycle 16
2
3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3
& œJ œJ . Jœ . œJ . œJ Jœ . œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ.
J J JJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J JJ J
Melodic Dom. 7th Chord
5
T1 6 P11/3/6/7 9
P3/10 1 2 4 7
3 str
[015]+[015]
str [0148]
[7] [0156] [01378]
jj r j. j. b b b n œœœœ ...
& ∑ Œ ‰ b œ œœ # œjœ Ó ∑ Ó Œ ≈ J.
b œ n # œœ œœœœ n # # œœœœœ .... œœœœœ .... ≈ Œ
>
ƒ > Ï π
F
'Melodic fractal'
accented
P3/7/10 4 5 6 7 8
( P10 4 3 2)
214
ww/br
P0/9 9 10 11 P0/8 9 10 11 12
pno [037]
π P f
[0237]
[9] [8]
3 3
3 3 3 3 3
3
j3 j
# œœœ œœœ œœœ # œœ œœ œœ n œ œ œ j ‰
œ bœ Ó ‰‰ J #œ œ œ # œœ œœ œœ n b œœ œœ œœ
œ # # œœœœ œœœœ œœœœ
3 3
& œœœœ œ # œ # œœ œœ ‰ ‰ ‰ œ œ œœ œ œ J œ b œ œ b œœ œ œœ
‰
3
># œ > #œ > œ œ ‰ œ b œ b b œœœœ n œœ b œœœ n œ b œœ n b # œœœœ œœœœ œœœœ
œ #œ œ œ
3 3
3
f J
[013][10]
>
pno [0268] [10] [01458]
[013] [9]
> â >
f
P0/3 ( P3 6
T2
'Melodic fractal' P0/10 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 7
9
4
accented ( P11 4 5 6 7) 5)

2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2
œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œ Jœ œ Jœ œ Jœ œ Jœ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
19 20 21 22 23
Supercycle #5
3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 23 3 3 2 3 3
3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3
& œJ . œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ.œ. œ. œ œ.
J J J J J JJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J JJ J J J
P4 12 ( P9 12
[014589] 9
10 11 12 1 9
fragment P1/8 3 3 11
'pivot' ( P9/4 12) 2 2
T1 3 8 10 11
to P4 1 1)
( P5/(0) 12 1 3 8 10)
10 11 12
pno
[5] [02479]
[01458] r r >j
# œœœœ ..n b b n œœœœ œœœœ n b œœœ .. œœœ .. b œ b œ œ n # œœ ..
& J .. R R
# œœ ... œœ ... ≈ Œ ∑ ∑ œœ œœ œ b œ œ n # œœœ#...˙˙ ∑
J J # # ˙˙˙
p
[0347] tetrachord
π ƒ
str
Ï [02479]
( P8/3 4 12 2 3) ∏
P1/8 10 11 12 1 P4 12
9
215
pno 11
P8/3/11/5 5 6 7 8 9 2
1 P4/6/2 1 2 3 4
ƒ
[5]
Ï
pno
[01368] [0258] [01468]
[0258] 3
cl/bsn/trpt/trbn/crot
3 3
>
3 [024] [0246]
- -
3
>
3
>œ j j
œ b œ Œ b b œœ œœ‰ œ b œœ b b œœ Œ -
Œ ‰
# # œœ nœœœ # # # # œœœœœ œœœœœ # n œœœ
œ
œœœ b b n b b œœœœœœœ œœœœœ œ œ ∑ Ó
3
& Ó œ b œ # n œœ n œœ œœ
œ œ œœ b œœ œœ # # # œœœœ œ œœœœ ‰ # œ # œœœ n œœœ b b œœœœ
œœ -
œ J n œ œ ‰‰Œ
3
3
ƒ F J J J p F
[037] [0258]
f
[01369]
3 - 3 - -
cl/hn/trpt ob/cl/bsn/br
p F
T2 9-10-11-12 unit fragment P3/10/7 9 10 11 12 +P1 1 3
[014589] ( P11/6/3 3 8 10 +P9 11 12 )

fragment
( P7/2/11 12 1 3 +P5 8 10 )
Cycle 13 Cycle 14
3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œœ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œJ œ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
24 25 26 27 28
3
Supercycle #6
Cycle 20 Cycle 21 D Cycle 22 Cycle 23
3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3
& œJ . œJ . œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ.
J J J J J JJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J JJ J J J J J J J J J
11 4 10
P1 10 5 6
12 6 8
8 7 9
T1 4
3
str/gran cassa P4/11/8/2 4 5 6 7 8 P4/10/7/2/0 9 7 8 P4/11/8/3 10 11
[0158]+[0158]
[0123578T] ww/br ww/br/gl
[012368]
[0258] [02469] [0158]
G.P.
>r >j
œ Œ . j j r j œ r
œ œ‰ Œ ∑ Ó Œ ≈ b b œœœœ ... œœœ ... b œœr œœœ # œœj œœ ≈ Œ Œ ‰ œœœœœ b b œœœœ b b b œœœœ ... n œœœ œœœ b n b œœœœ ....
& ‰ ≈ b œœœœœ b # n œœœœ J œ . b b œœ œœœ n œœj.. œœj..
œ œ n œ-œ œœ œ b œ-œ .. œœ ..
p
J bœ . nœ œ J
R f f
5
10
Ï
'pivot' ( P11 4 8 7 ( trpt/trbn P4 6 11 8 9 10 )
216
5 3 12
6 10 8
7 1 2
9) 4
1
P11/(4) 11 12 *10 12 5
9 10
3 6
trbn/str
[015] trpt/str
[11]
[02479] [0247]
G.P. 3 3 3 3
œ Œ Ó ∑ ∑ Ó j ∑
& œœœ ‰ ‰ b œœ œjœ #
3
# # œœœœ œœœœ n œ ‰ Œ
b œ œ b b œœœ œœ œ œ b œœœ
p F
( P4 12 10
9 7
11 8
T2 2 4)
1

2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œœ œœ œ œ œœ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œ Jœ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
29 30 31 32 33 34
Supercycle #7
Cycle 24 Cycle 25 Cycle 26 E
3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ
J J J JJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J JJJ J J J J J J J
[014589] 4 *12 *2 *3 *7 )
Melodic Dom. 7th Chord fragment
10*11*12 *1 *3
T1 ( P1/(5)/(8) 1 *4 12 *2
( P2/(6)/(9) 3 *8 *10 *11 *12 )
P6/(10)/(1) 9 *10 11 *12 P11/1/2/(5)/7 2 3
( P10/(2)/(5) 12 *1 *3 *8 *10 )
12
str
pno [0127]
[4] [037] [037] [02368]
[01358] [037] [4]
- [037] œ j j œ
œ- . # œ
>œ # b œœ>œœ œœœœœ
‰ Ó ∑ Ó ‰ ≈ b œœ œœ b œœ .. b œœœ ... ≈ Œ
J ‰ œœœ b œœ œ b œœ ... # b œœœœ .... ≈ Œ # œœ ≈ œR
J J‰
& b b b œœœœœ ...
-. bœ J b œ- -
p f ƒ
217
[0347] tetrachord
'pivot'
to P2 ( P2/10 4 12 2 3 )
( P9/1/(8)/(4) 1 *2 3 )
P11/(4)/7/(0) 12 P11/7/2/9 3 4 5 6 7 8 P11/6 9 10 11 P7/3 10 11 12 1
*11 2
cl/str picc/trpt cl/hn
pno [0247] [02479] [4]
[4] [01358] [7]
[0158] 3
3 3 3
3
- j3
>
& Œ ‰ ‰ # # œœœœ œœœœ # œœ œœ n # # œœœœœ œœœœœ œœœœœ n œœœœ œœœœ b n b b œœœœ b n œœœœ b b b œœœ. n n œœœ œœœ b œjœ ‰ ‰ b œ- œ j b œj œ ‰‰ Œ Ó Œ
3 3
J J J b œ n œœ œœ b œœœ b œ œ œ œ b œ œ ‰ ‰ # œœ n œœ œ b œœj œœ ‰
3 3 3
J
3 3 3
J - - J œ- œ - œ-
F f p f p F
p π
T2

2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2
& œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
35 36 37 38 39
Supercycle #8
Cycle 27 Cycle 28 F Cycle 29 Cycle 30
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3
3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ
J J J J J J J J J JJ J J JJ J J J J J J J J J J J JJ J J J J J J J J
9-10-11-12 unit fragment P10/2 9 10 11 12 1 3

'pivot' P6/10 3 8 10 11 12
T1 to P10
P5/2 5 6 7 8 P2/6 12 1 3 8 10
4 *5 pno pno
ww/br [3] [8]
[012368] [01357]
G.P.
> œ.
b œœ .. œœ b œ .. b œ . b b œœ œœ
b b œœ n n œ>œœ .. ∑ ∑ ≈ J R b œJ J R ∑
œ . # œœ œœ n œj. œœ .. b œœ œœ b œ
œ.
& n b n œœœœ ‰ ≈ b œœJ .. Ó J R R # œ . J R J Jœ
J π
ƒ ƒ π
[014589]
218
fragment P7/4 10 11 12 1 3
P4/11/(6) *5 'pivot' ( P3/0 3 8 10 11 12 )

6 7 8
to P3 P1/3/8/10/5 1
pno ( P11/8 12 1 3 8 10 )
pno ww/str [0158]+[0158]
[0123578T] hn/str ob/cl/bsn/trpt/trbn/pizz/tamb basco
[025] [027]
3 [9] [02479]
3
3
^ 3 œ -
œœœ b œj Œ Œ œ œ #œ œ j3œ œ- œ j
& Ó ∑ ∑ œ ‰ Œ
3 3
‰ œœ ‰ b œœ œœ ‰ b œ œ œ œ # œœ œœ œ œ ‰ ‰ b b œœœ
œ bœ b œœœœœ b b œœ
G.P.
b œœ J J >
ƒ π J
P2 3
π 3 3 ƒ
2
∏
1
P11 4 11
5 10
T2 6 12
7 8

3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2
& œœ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
40 41 42 43 44 45
3
Supercycle #9
Cycle 31 Cycle 32 G Cycle 33 Cycle 34
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3
& œJ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ.
J J J J J J J J JJ J J JJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
( P1 11
P1 5
P10 4 5
10
5 2
1
T1 6 6
7
7 12
8
P1/3 1 2 3
P(1)/3 5 6 8 9 *10 9) P0/3 11 12 1
4
str pno
pno [037]+[037] [10] pno
[10] [0158] [9]
- [023579] œ. ˙. œ n œ œ b œ [012579] nœ . œ.
œ - b -
œ b œ # # œœœ ... ˙˙˙ ... # >.
& œ ‰ Œ b œ b œ # n n œœœ>œœœ œœœœœœ ≈ ‰ Ó Œ ≈ J ‰ œ œ œ b œ b b # œœœœœœ .... b œ . ≈ Œ
J Ó
J bœ œ R R
‰ ≈ œœ œœ œJ .
R R
∏ ƒ π
ƒ
219
[0347] tetrachord
P10 3
P0/3 11 12 1 10
2 3 2
1 P10/6 8 9 10 11 pno
[9] [0236]
trpt/str
str pizz. [014] 3
str [8] 3
-
[025] œ Œ
j3 œ bœ œ œ œ b œœœ œ b œ œ-
b b œ>œ ‰ b b œœœ www www Œ ‰ ‰ # œ n œ œ # œœœ œœœ
3
œœœ ‰ ‰ ‰ œœ œ b œ œœ b œ n œ b œ
3 3 3 3 3
& œœœœœ b b œœœœœ ‰ b b œœœ Œ J J ‰
3
> π
[9] [11] [9]
Ï π π p
fl/cl
F
T2 P5/(2) 2 3 4 5
Cycle 24 Cycle 25
3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œJ œ œJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
46 47 48 49 50
Supercycle #10
Cycle 35 H Cycle 36 Cycle 37
3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 33 2 2 3 3 2 3
& œJ . œJ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ.
J J J J J J J J J J J J J JJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J
P3/6 8 10 11
P7/10 11 12 1
T1 ( P10/4 12 3 11 2) P1/4 7 5 4
P3/5/7/10 8 9 10 11 12 pno
P4/10/(3/9) 5 6 7 8 P5/3/(8) 7 8 9 *10 *11
str
pno [02479]
∏
[0247] [024679] [9]
[6] bsn/str
[025] # # # œœœœ j r j
r œœœœ n n b n œœœœœ # n # œœœ œœœ n œœœ .. œœœ .. œrœ
# œ œ ˙
b œœ b œ b œœ .. œœ .. # œœ œœ # # œœ
J J # œ # œœ
œ n b b œœ
œ
- œ [026]
œ ‰ ≈ R J J œ œ œœ .. œœ .. # œœœœ œœœœœœ ˙ œ œ b œœ ..
& ‰ ≈ œ R J J J R -œ ..
œ # # œjœ . n # œœœ œœœ ‰ . R J b œœ .. œœ .. b b œœ œœ œ # œœ œ œ
J
[3]
f S p F p f ƒ J J R J # œJ
cl/hn

π
220
P0/9 8 10 11 12
P10/4 4 5 6 7 8 P4/1 11 12 1 3
'pivot' (
P4/10 1 12 3 11 2) P10/7 7 5 4 6
to P4
pno
fl/ob/bsn
[0158] [6] [0123678] [01245679]
- [7]
œ œœ b œœ> œ b n b œœ œœ> œœœœœ>
# b nb#n œœ
Œ Ó Ó ‰ # œœ # œ b œœ n b n œœ œ ‰ Œ Ó j3 ∑
3
& œ ‰ b b œœ b b œœ œœ # œ œ ‰‰ Œ
3 3 3 3
J
3
œ œ
[8] f F f f
P10/5 7 8 9 10
f
T2 *6

2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œœ œ œ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œ œJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
51 52 53 54 55
Supercycle #11
Cycle 38 I Cycle 39 Cycle 40 Cycle 41
3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3
& œJ . œJ . Jœ Jœ œJ . œJ . œJ . Jœ œJ . œJ . œJ . œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ.
J J J J J J J J J J JJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J
12
3 P8/1 5 6 7 8 9
T1
6 pno
[7] [027]
œ
œ. j œœ œœ œ . # œ . œœ œœ œ # # # œœœ ... œœœ ...
& œ. œ ˙ ∑ ∑ ∑ J J ≈ Œ
bœ ˙ R œJ . Jœ . R
∏
[0347] tetrachord
P6/(3) 1 11 10 *12
( P4/(1) 2 4 5 *6 )
'pivot'
to P1 ( P1/(11) 3 12 4 *2 )
P6/3 4 6 7 8
[3] [6] fl/ob
bsn/trpt [9]
3
221
pno 3 3 3
π -
j j3 j
bœ œ b œ œ b œ œ # œj œœ œ j3 j3 œ œ j #œ œ œ œ
∑
œœœ œ œœ b œœ œœ œ œœ b œœœ œœœ ‰ œ œ œ
3 3
&
œ œ œ b œ œ n # œœ œ œ œJ œ
3
‰ ‰ œJ œ œ # œœ œœ œœ œ
nœ œœ œœ ‰ ‰ ‰ œ œ œ œ J
3 3 3 3
3
‰ ‰ b Jœ
J J # # œœ œwn œœœ J
3 [6]
∏
3
p ‰‰ J J
[8] [0358] fl/str
[014589]
fragment P0/4 7 5 4 6 9
π p
P6/0 2 1 3
'pivot' ( P2/6 8 10 11 12 3)
T2 to P6
( P6/10 11 12 1 3 10)
cb P9 6 ( P2 12
3
( P6 2 ) 2
1)
3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œJ œ œJ œ Jœ œ œJ œ œ œJ œ Jœ œ Jœ œ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
U-sequence: 5 6 4 6 5 6
56 57 58 59 60 61
A' 2
Supercycle #12
Cycle 42 J Cycle 43 Cycle 44 Cycle 45
3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 33 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 3
& œJ . œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ.œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ.
J J JJ J J J J J J J J JJ J J J J J J JJ J J J J J J J JJ J J J J
'pivot' P9 12 1 2 3 4
P2/9/6/0 5 6 7 8
T1 Hex [014589]
P9/4 5 7 8 str
P1 10 11 12 1 ( 3 8 7 10 2) fl/cl [0258]
pno - [0257] [7] j j r
œ œ b r ob/trpt
b œ # œ œ n b b ˙˙˙˙ œ. œ œ Œ
≈ b œœœœ .... b œœ ... n œœ œœœ n œœj.. œ
b œ Œ ∑ ∑ ∑ b b œœ .n b œœ œ b œœ .. œ ..
˙
& œœ ≈ œJ . œœ .. Rœ œ
J p J
[7]
∏ π p P P -
cb P9 9
F
( P6 7 ) P9 12 P4/11 10
4 P5/9 9 10 11 12
3
2 'pivot' ( P4/8 1 4 12 2 )
P2/6/9 2 3 4 P4/11 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 to P4
222
P(9)/(0) *8 9 10
pno ww/hn/rim shot/pizz.
trpt/trbn [4] pno
str [037] [7]
[3] [0358][0156]
3 [01458] 3 3
3 3
3 3 3
œ œ œœ # œ
œ
Œ ‰ # œœ- œœ
b b œœ ˙˙ # # œœ n œ j j >œ b b œ>œœœ œ
‰ œœ Ó Œ
3 3
& œ ‰ ‰ n n b # # œœœœœ ˙˙˙˙˙
3
3
‰ ‰ # œœ œœ n œœ ‰ ‰ b œœœœ œ œ œ œ œj œ # œj œ ‰ Œ
œ œ
3
J‰ ‰ J J >
bœ œ œ œ œ œ œ
-
π 3 π >
∏ ƒ p π
'pivot' ( P2 11
to P2 10
1
12
8)
T2

3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2
œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œJ œ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
62 63 64 65 66 67
K Cycle 46 Cycle 47 Cycle 48
3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œJ . Jœ . œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J JJ J J J JJ J J J J J J J
P0 6 [026] fragment
7 P0/10 9 11 12 10
8 P6/3 9
T1 4
( P7/5 1 12 2 4)
P1/10 1
5
P4/6/9/1 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 fl/cl bsn/hn
ww [10] [9]
str
- [0358] [01358] œ- œ œ- .
b-œ . n œœ œœ r j œ œ œ.
œ. œ œ œ j
Ó ‰ ≈ # # # # œœœœ œœœœ n n œœœœ .... n b b œœœœ ... œœœ Ó RJ œ. #œ ‰ bœ
& b Jœ . R .
œœœ b œjœ œj œj œr # # œjœœ .. ˙˙˙ J œ œ bœ
R R J J œ œ b œœ œœœ œœ œœ # # œœ ... ˙˙
œ œ π R
p
P10/(5) 1 11 12
P π Ø
π
[014589] ( P2/(9) 8 1 3
11 1 fragment (
P6/(1) 11 8 10
( P5/(0) 3 12 2
'pivot'
P0 to P10 P0/7 10 12 9
( P7/2 4 2 1
223
P2/6/9 12 9 10 P10/5 4 11 1
'pivot'
[0358]+[0358]
to P9 ( P9/1/4 2 1 4) [024579]
pno
fl/cl/hn [036]+[036] [037]+[037] 3
[037] pno
[3] [0347] [023589] [01358]
. 3-
3 3
- ‰ . .
#œ œ - œœ j j3 j b œ b œœ j 3
‰ # # œœœ œœœ œœ œœJ b b œœœ ‰ œ œœ œœ b œœ # n œœœœ œœ ‰ Ó ∑ Ó œœ œ b œœ
3
& œ
3
‰ # # œœœœ œœ œ ‰nbœn œœœœœœœ œœœœœœœ Œ
3 3 3
J Œ b œœœœ œœœœŒ
3
J Ó Œ# # œœ œœ ‰ ‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ Œ
3
J J
3 [8]
P F π J J -
ob/trpt
3-
π ∏
12
-
P0/3 12 1 2 3 10
p π
P9/1 8 10 12 11
T2
( P1/5 11 12 1 3)
( P7/11 7 5 4 6 )
Cycle 35 Cycle 36 Melodic Major 7th Chord

3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
68 69 70 71 72
Supercycle #13
Cycle 49 L Cycle 50 Cycle 51 Cycle 52
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3
& œJ œJ . œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ.
J J J J J J JJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
[0347] tetrachord
P5/1 3 6 5 7 8
T1 12 10 P10/0/5 1 11 10 12
P3/11 9 10 3 1 7
2 4
pno ww
[4] [027]
> # œœ- .. #œ -
jœ . œ . ≈ Œ b b œœ œ # œœ n # œœR œœ
œ œ œœœ # œœ œœœ ...
& b œœ œ . œ. ∑ ‰ Ó Œ ≈ b œœ ‰ Ó
J
p F P π p P
( P2/4/9 8 1 12 3)
*10 8 ( P5/7/0 11 8 3 10 )
'pivot'
*12 11 ) to P8 ( P8/10/3 2 4 5 6)
*3 Melodic Major 7th
1) ( P5/7/0 3 12 4 2)
Chord fragment
*4 10 ) P7/2/11/6/9/(4) 7 4 6
11 12 P9/4/1/8/11/(6) 8 11 12
224
12 2)
( P5/0/9/4/7/(2) 1 8 10 )
3 2 [0347] tetrachord P6/8/10//1 7 8 9
( P4/11/8/3/6/(1) 10 12 2) str
P10/7 10 11 12 1
[02459]+[02459] [036]+[036]
( P1/8/5/0/3/(10) 11 1 3)
fl/ob
[0135679] [014568] str pizz. [9]
∏
[0247]
3 [024579] 3
3 [01358]
-
3
3
> j œ œ œ œ >
Œ # œj > # œ n œœ n œ b œJ œ œ ‰ ‰ ‰ # # n œœœæœ ˙˙˙æ˙ æ
˙ œæ @j
œœœ ‰ Œ # œœœœ œœœ
‰‰ n œ # ˙˙˙ # œœœ œœœ œœœ b b n b œœœœ œœœæœ
‰ b b b b œœœœœœ Œ J b œ b œ œœœ œœœ œœœ
3
# œœ œœ œ œ n œ œ b œ
3 3
œœ ‰ œœœœ Œ b b b b œœœœœ
3
& Œ # # # # # œœœœœœœ œœœœœ ‰ Œ # œ œœ œ œ œ ‰ ‰
3 3
>
3
J
3
# œœ œœ n œJ œ > ‰ # œœ œ œ ‰‰ J # œœJ œœ œœ œœ b b œœJ
J
3 3 3
[01356]
f
3
J P
trbn
J
( P5/2 4 12 2 3)
Ï
pno [025]
[8] [0148]
( P2/11 12 1 3 8)
F
pno
π
T2 ( P6/3 3 8 10 11 ) F p P8/3/5 4 5 6 7
( P8/5 5 4 6 2) P9/1 9 10 11 8
( P4/8 1 4 12 10)
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2
& œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œœ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
73 74 75 76 77
3
Supercycle #14
M Cycle 53 Cycle 54 Cycle 55
3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3
& œJ . œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ.
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J JJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J
P3 1
12 P5 7 P5 12 1
9 9 4 12
9-10-11-12 unit
3 3 P1 2 3 8
( P3 5 4 7 6 2 3 12 9 5 6 2 3
11 ) P9 4
2 12
T1 'pivot' P5 10 11 8 12 1 5 9 3 5
to P5 9 P10/2/1/5 12 1
4 10
P1 3 8 1 10 11 9 6 12
6 P5/9/8/0 2 3
P8/7/5/3/1/11 2 3 4 7 )
( P9 12 1 11 3 8 6 5 10 [01358]
ww/br/tamb basca/castanets/pizz. fl/cl/hn pno/gran cassa
cl/hn
[013579] [10] [0347]
-
[025] pno
r j j b œr œ
r j j > bœ œ
r r b jœ j œ œ œ . œ œ # # ˙˙- œ b œ . œ . b œœœœ œœœœ œ
œœ b >œ b œ> œj. œœr œœr ‰ .
& ‰ ≈ b b œœ ‰ ≈ ≈ n n # n n œœœœœœ œœœœœœ ‰ Œ ≈ œ .. b œ .n œ œ œ . œ œ # ˙#œ œ #œ œ nœ œœœ œœœ œœ b b œœœœ b œœœœœ ... # œœœ ... # b œœ œœ
b b œœœœœœ œœœœœœ b # n œœ-œ - œ œ.R JR J . > >
- π F
‰ ≈ œœR œœJ J
> ƒ
[01358] [013578]
Ï p F p >
P1/11 5 6 7 8 9
225
P10/2/1/5 10
str p f
P11/(1)/3/4/8 8 10 *11 12
10 11 ( P5/9/8/0 4 )
P7/0/(5)/3/8 11 12 *1 3
P1/6/11/9/2 7 5 *4 6
3 fl/str
3 Melodic Major 7th Chord
3 [01469]
j
œœœæœ œœœ@œ n œæ ˙ @j Œ j
œœœ ˙˙˙ œœ œœœæœ b œœœœ ˙˙˙æ˙ œ œ
#œ œ œœ
œ n œœœ œœœ œœœ ‰‰ Ó
œ œ œ ∑ Ó Œ ‰ #b œœœœœ
3
& ˙˙˙ œ # n œœœ œœœ b b œœœ œœœ n œJ œ J
3
J
[025]
-
[0247]
3 - 3 -
∏
8 9 10 11 P2 10 ( P9 4
1 3
T2 12 2
9 1
11 12 )
Cycle 40 Cycle 41
3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œœ œœ œœ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
78 79 80 81 82
Supercycle #15
Cycle 56 N Cycle 57 Cycle 58
3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œJ . œJ . œJ œJ œJ . œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
9
( P7 8 12 10 11 4 7) 'pivot'
[026] fragment to P2
T1 P11 11 3 12 1 2 5 4 3
4 ( P4/11/8/10/2 1 2
( P2/4 7 5 2 8 6)
4)
( P5 7 6 5 4 8 12 ) P9/4/1/3/7 9 12 10 P9/11 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1 P3/1/5/7 11 12
pno
ww/hn/frusta/whistle str
[9] [2]
[02368] [0246]
pno œ > >
#œ œ #œ
œ # œ œœ .. œ >œ b # œ>œœ œœ>œœ >
Œ
œœ .. # œœ- œœ b œœ b b œœ œœ .
& Ó J œœœœœ ≈ ‰ ‰ b b œœœœœ ≈ œœ .. b jœ. n œœR œœ
J R ‰ ‰ ≈ R Œ b œœœœ ‰ Œ
# # œœœœ ≈ b œœR
J R J bœ. J R J J J
π p p Ï
Ï
[0347] tetrachord
P4/2 3 5 P4/6/11 6 5
226
P5/7 10 11 12 1
( P7/9 7 4 6 1 7 P6/8/1 12 10 ) 'pivot'
to P3 ( P3/5 5 4 6 2 )
P1/3 11 1 3 4 11 +P8 2 4
pno
str pizz.
pno cl/trbn fl/ob/trpt [2]
[10]
[01369] 3 [027] 3 3
bœ ˙ >œ j 3 3
ww Œ ‰ b b œœœœ ˙˙˙˙ Ó œ œ´ œœ œ œœ
œœ œ J
3
‰‰œ
3
& www ‰ ‰ # # œœ
3
‰ ‰ bb œœ ‰ b œj ‰ ‰ n œj ‰ ‰ œ́ ‰ ‰ b b œœ ‰ œ́J ‰ ‰ Œ
J
3 3
J > bœ nœ J ∏
p > ÿ p
P2 11 ( P9 12 7
f
10 4
F ( trpt P 8 9 )
7 5 [014589] ( P5/7 1 8 10 2 1 P5/10/0 3 12 )
8 10 fragment
T2 P9/11 8 11 12 7 8 P11 11 5
9 1)
P1/3 11 1 3 4 11 P3 1 6

2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œ œœ œ œ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œ œJ œ Jœ œ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
83 84 85 86 87
Supercycle #16
O Cycle 59 Cycle 60 P Cycle 61
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3
& œJ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ.
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
[026] fragment P(2)/(3)/5/6/8/(11) 1 2 *4
*10 ) P0/11/9/7/5/3 3 6 7 8
T1 ( P(7)/(8)/10/11/1/(4) 9 12
str
pno/tamb picc/wb/tamb basco
[013469] [013579]
^ ‰ ≈ ^r ^ @j
j j ‰ b œj ‰ Œ œæœ . # # # œœœœœœ œœœœœœ n n b n b b œœœœœœ ... œœœœœœ ... b b b œœœœœ œœœœœ
& Ó Œ œœœœ n n n œœœœ b œœœ . . œ
≈ b b b n œœœœœ ...
œ ..
b b b œœœœœœ œœ # œ b œœœœœ œœœœœ # œœœœœ ...
. ‰ ≈ b œœR
œœœœœ b b b œœœœœ b.. b œœœœ .... @J æ @J !Rœ æ
‰ J
R J R J .. π
Ï >
[01468]
> > >
ww/br Ï
P11/0/3/5/7 1 2 4 5
( P4/5/8/10/0 9 12 10 7)

P5/2 7 5 4 6 P0 10 ( P7 4
1 3
227
( P7/4 8 10 11 12 ) 12 2
( P11/8 11 12 1 3) 9 1
11 ) 12 )
P4/5/7/9/0 1 2 3 4 5 ( P0/9 5 8 6
fl/str pno [3] [01469]

[01358] [012469] [0134] 3
3
œœ œ œœ œœœ # # # œœœ- - > j ‰
œœœœœ b b n n b b œœœœœœ Œ ∑ ‰ b œœœœ œœœœ b œœ œœ # œœ Œ b>œœœœ
œ œ œ
3
& J œœœœ # œœœ b œœ n # œœ J œœ œ œœ
3 3 3
J - - œœœ ‰ ‰
3
b œœœ œœœ ‰ n œœ
3
# œœœ ‰‰ # # œJœœ
3 3
J
3
J J J
ƒ > >
[0158]
> >
ww/br
T2 Melodic Dom. 7th Chord
P3/10/7/2 11 9 12 10
'pivot'
to P10 P10/5/2/9 12 1 2 4
Cycle 45 Cycle 46
3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œJ œ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
88 89 90 91
Cycle 62 Cycle 63
3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3
œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ.
& œJ . J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
P0/6 3 5 6 7 8
P7/8/0/3 9 10 11
cl/hn
str
T1 ∏ pizz. cl/bsn
[6]
F
9 10 11
P
[6]
Ï p
> >j >r
r r -j
j r
œœœœ ... n n b # œœœœœœ œœœœœœ j œ
b œ œœ œœ .. œ
bb œœœ ‰ ‰ ≈ œ
bœ œœ
-j
b b b b œœœœœœ œœœœœœ n n # n # œœœœœœ .... œœ .. b n œœ .. œ œ b œœ œœœ # œœ ≈ # # nœ>œœœ ≈ n œ # œœ ..
& @Jœœ .. !R æ æ !R @J ‰ ≈ œ œ J
œ ≈ # œ
R J J ‰ ≈ œœœ Œ
R J > > R
[0158]
ƒ > >
[9] [037] P0/6 9 10
ob/bsn/rim shot
ƒ Ï
P0/9 2 3 4
P6/7/3/4 9 11
P8/5 7 8
pno
228
P7/10 4 5 6 7 8 9 7 8 10 11 *12
pno
[4]
Ï
[015]+[015]
f
[016]+[016]
[013568] [023569]
[0134] [9]
f
[0258]
ƒ f
3 [0158]
[025] 3 3 3
3 3
- - ^ ^
> j -j j
‰ # # # œœœœ b œ j œ œ œ bœ >œ œ b>œ œ -j œ Œ
#œ bœ œ b œœ b œœ b œœœ bœ œœ b œ b œ œ #œ ‰ ‰ # œœœ œœœ # œœœ ‰ ‰ ‰ # # œœ ‰ # œœœ
#œ bœ J b œœ J œ n œ œ #œ ‰ # # œœœ Œ ‰ b b œœ
3
& œœœœ œ n œ n œœ œœ
œ bœ - b œœœ ˙˙˙ œœœ
> n œ œ œœœ n œœœ œœœ œ
3 3
b œœœ œœœ
3
J ‰ ‰ ‰ # œœ œœ
3 3
> œœœ œœœ J
3
J
3 3
- J - -
3
‰ ‰ J
[7]
J J
cl/bsn
[025]
f ƒ picc/trpt/trbn
T2 P0/7 1 2 3 4
P6/1/4 4 3 5 7
p
6 7
fl/ob P6/10 11 12 1 2
( P2/6 8 10 11 4
( P0/4 7 5 4 8) Cycle 47
3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œJ J J J J J J J J J J J
92 93 94
3 Supercycle #17
Cycle 64 Cycle 65 Q Cycle 66
3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œJ . œJ . œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ
J J J J J J J J J J J J J JJ J J J JJ J J J J J J J J
( P3/11 9 8 7)
( P8/4 2 5 3)
5
P3
2 ( P0/3/7 11
8 3 12 2)
T1 1 6
9
6 7 ( P11/2/6 3 4 7 5)
12 11
12 4
2 P6/9/1 7 5 8
9 5 6
10
3
[01367] picc/cl/trpt
pno [013468T]
[037]
P
^
ob/hn
-j - str Ï ^j j # œrœ j [0158] j
œœœœ .. ≈ # # œœœœ^
œ . r jb œ ≈ b b œœœœ .. œœœœœ n n œœœ œ .. Ó Ó Œ
j œj œœr œœr œœœ ...
œ œ œ
œ
b b œœœ ... œœ ≈ J‰ Œ ≈ œœœ ... b œœ ... n œ œ
[0146]
& b œœ . b œœ œœ œœœ #bœœœœœ #œœœ œœœ # # œœ . œ
œœœ ‰ ≈ œ œ Jœ
[0236]
J J œ # œœœ ...
[9]
œœœ J R œJ .. R J p R J
[026]
J P
> f p
11 [014589] P1/10 10 11
8
π
12 P1/3/7 4 5 6 7
229
fragment
P5/2 12 1
P9/6 3 8
Melodic Dom. 7th Chord P5/7/9/10/0/2 1 12 2
10
P0/2/(6) 9 10 11 12 1 *4 P1/3/6/8 5 6 7
9 ( P10/0/2/3/5/7 9 11 12 )
cl/bsn/hn str
str
[015]+[015] [024579]
p
[013458] [026] 3 [0257]
P
[023] 3
ƒ
3 3 3
3
3
^
3
>j
3
j > > - - 3 >j 3 >
j j 3
‰ ‰ b b œœœ Œ Œ # œœ - # œ
‰ ‰ b œœœœœ ‰‰ # n œœœœ Œ ‰ ‰ œœœœœœ
‰ ‰ œ b b œœœ # n œœœ # œ # œœœ >
œœ # # œœœ Ó œœ œ œ # œ œj j # œœœ œœœ b b œœœ
œ œ œ œ # œ œ # œœ œœ b œœ
‰ ‰ # œœœœ œœœœ n œjœœ œœœ # œœj
œœœœœ œ œ # œœ
3 3
& ˙‰˙ ‰ œœœ ‰
˙ œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ Ï J J œ œ >
[9] [02479]
J
3
J
pno
T2 8 p F
P1/(10) 4 5 7 8 9
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œ Jœ œ Jœ œ Jœ œ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
95 96 97 98 99
Supercycle #18
Cycle 67 Cycle 68 R Cycle 69 Cycle 70
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3
& œJ Jœ . œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ.
J J J J JJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
( P6/8/(0) 5 6 7) Melodic Major 7th Chord
P6/9 7 5 4 6
P9 4 5 10
3 6 1 ( P8/11 8 10 11 12 )
2 7 12
T1 1 8 9 ( P0/3 11 12 1 3 )
11 P11/(0)/4/(7) 1 2 3 4 P11/1/4/7 6 5 7
pno pno str
pno/tamb basco
[9]
F
[0146] [0158] [02459] [0358]
π
[0237] [01469] cl/trpt
π
[0258]
f
[9]
>
+cl/bsn
-j j -r j - r ^r r
^j ^j ^r j j œ.
b
≈ œœœœ ... œœœœ ≈ n b . Œ
b œ œ -.
≈ b œœœœ œœœœ ...
. n -œ b œœœ
n b œœœ
œœœ
œœ b œ. b œ. n # œœ # œ- . ‰ ≈ œœ œœœ# # # # œœœœ ≈n n n n œœœœ ≈ b œœœœœ œœœœœb œœ‰ œ bœ.
≈ œœ œ œ b b b œœœ ..≈ Œ
b œ œ .. b b œœœ n n b œœœœ n œœœ ...
# # œ œ . œ œœ œ b œœ # # œœœb nn œœœ ... œ bbbœœœœ œœœœ Œ ‰ bœ J
& b b œœ b œ œ n b œœœœ ... -œ . ≈ ≈ J
.. œœ ... n œœœ œœœ b œ b œ œ.
J J R J
[0158]
J b œ .. ƒ
[0258]
J J
[10] [025] picc/ob/cl/hn
J J R J . œJ . J-
p -
picc/cl/trbn
π
π p
P9/10/2/5 5 6 7 8
+P0 6 3 P6/9 12 11 2 9 10
P π
1 3 12
( P1/4 2 12 9 1 4)
8 10 3 +P11 1 4
230
11 12 10
Hex [014589]
P9/7 4 1
Melodic Major 7th Chord P(3)/7 1 3 8 10 *11 *12
P8/6 9 10
P8/3 11 12 1 3 P10 10 ( P5 4 P7/(11) 8 10 11 12 *1 *3
'pivot' 1 3
8 10 P11/(3) 11 12 1 3 *8 *10
9 to P4 ( P4/11 8 10 11 12 ) 12 2
9 1 P5/(9) 7 4 5 6 *2 *9
( P2/9 7 5 4 6) 11 12 )
pno
P
[01368] P11/3/6 2
3 [02479] ob/bsn str [8] [037]
3 [7] [5] [0246] picc/bsn/trpt
3 [01469]
3
j
3
j œœ œœœœ œœœœ œœ j 3 b>œ b œ >œ œ
# œœœ ˙˙˙ ..
œœœœ œœ # œœœ œœœœœb b n œœœ
‰ œœ ˙˙ .. Ó Œ ‰‰
œ œ # œ # # œœœ # œ œœœœ
3
b b œœ œœœœœ ‰ ‰ œ b b œœ b b œœ œœ œœœœ Œ ‰ b œ
3 3 3
& œ œ J J b œœ
‰ œ
[037]
˙.
3
∏ π 3
cb
<œ < < p- p
π
p
T2 π
P2 7
Cycle 51 Cycle 52
3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œJ œ œJ œ œJ œ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
100 101 102 103 104
Cycle 71 S Cycle 72
3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œJ . Jœ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
P6/9/11/2 1 12 2 3
( P11/2/4/7 9 11 12 1)
8 10
T1 ( P0/3/5/8 4 5 8 6)
ob/str P8/0/3 4 5 6 7 8
ob/cl/bsn/cb
[0358]
p F
j b œr œ [037]
b œœœ ... œœœ œœœ ‰ œjœ # jœ # œœœ .. œ. #>œœ .. j r j
œ . œœ # œ œ b œ b œ n # œœ œœ n # œœœœ # œ œ .. n n œœœ ... ≈ Œ Ó Œ # # œœœ ... n œœœ œœœ # # œœj..
& ‰ ≈ # œ œ b œœ n n œœ b œ n n œœ # œœ # # œœœ œœœ n # œœœ # œœ
R J J J ≈ œJ .
J #œ. œœœ ..
. # œœœ œœœ ‰
RR >
[7] [01468] [02368]
f
accented
> ƒ
[8] [7]
[048] [6]
> > >
pno 10 8 7 9)
( P0 9
( P(9)/11 8 2 3 7 10 *4 *12 2 6 8 8)
p
Melodic Dom. 7th Chord 5
f
P5/(0) 9 10 11 12 1 Hex [014589]
'pivot'
4 12 2 3 ) 4 7 8 'pivot' ( P8/(6) 3 8 10 11 *12 *1 3 2 4 6 6)
to P0 ( P0/(7) 1 5 *6
to P8
( P4/(2) 12 1 3 8 *10 *11 12 4 7 5 5 ) P3/5/6/9/11
accented ( P1/6 4 5 *6 7 8)
231
P0/(10) 9 10 11 12 1 *3 *8 10 7 2 9 9
4 5 6 7 8
9-10-11-12 unit 'pivot' P(5)/3 9 *10 *11 8 3 12 2 2 str P8 5 4
to P5
( P9/(7) *12 *1 11 10 3 7 7)
[02479] pno
F
( P1/(11) *3 *8 1 12 10 4 4)
4 6 5 7 8 10 3
3 [4] [026]
ƒ
pno 3
3 3
3
j 3 j
3
> b œ > > > ‰‰ b œ j > j3 3 >
j >
b œ nœ œ # œ n œ œ œœ œœœ œœ œœ j
œ j# >
j # œœœ œœœ œœ œœ ‰ œœ # œ œ œœ
b œ œœ b œœ n œ b b œœœ œ œœœ # œœœ œœ œœ # # œœœ œœœ b n b œœœ
œ œ œœ J b b œœ œœ
œœœœ n œœœ œœœ
œ # # œœ œœ œœœ n œœœ œœœ œœ# n œœœ
œ œœ œœ
3 3 3 3
œ
3
œ œœ
3
& œœœ œœj œœ # œœœ œœœ J œ ‰
[025][10] [026] [025] [015]
bœ œ J
[10] [025][027][025] [01269]
7
10 12
( P7 1
( P9 7 8
p
6
f f
8 11 7
T2 10) 4
P1 12 4 5)
4 3
1 11
1
Cycle 53 Cycle 54 12
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œ Jœ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
105 106 107 108
Supercycle #19
Cycle 73 Cycle 74
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œJ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
Hex [014589]
'pivot'
P11/3 4 5 6 7 8 P9/2/7 3 8 10 11 12 1 to P4
T1 pno
P5/10/3 12 1 3 8 10 11 ( P4/8 11
[4] 9-10-11-12 unit P1/6/11 9 10 11 12 1 3 8 P1/9 6

ƒ
str/glock picc/ob/cl pno
[02479] [027] [4]
^j ^ ^j ^
œœ ≈ # œr œr ^j
> j j œ œ ≈ œ
b œ # œœ ≈ n œœ ≈ œœ^
# # # œœœœœ n b b b b œœ>œœœ n n œ>œ œ b b œ>œ r
& Œ ≈ J ≈ ≈ œ œ
œ ≈ b œ
œ Œ J
J œœœ ≈ bb œœœœœ ≈ b œ n œœœ b b œœœ b œœ n # # œœœ œ n œœ ‰
bœ
[024579] [02479]
R > n œœ œ
Ï > > > ƒ
ƒ
P1/6/10/3/8 7 9 10 11 12
232
P10/0/1/3/4/6 3 4 6 7 8
ww/hn/trpt/vln
[023568] P10/9/7/4/3 5 4 11 12 1
3 2 3 3 3
3 trbn/str
>
[048] [026] [01367]
j j j 3
3
j j b œœ œœ n j
# œœ œ œ œœ œœ # œ œœœœœœ œœœœœœ # n n œœœœœ j
> > # # œ
# œœœ œœœœœ n n b œœœœœœ œœœœœ n œœ œœ # # œœœœœ #œ œœœœœœ ‰ ‰
& # œœœ # # œœœ # # # œœœ # b # œœœœœ n b n œœœœœ œœœœœ œœœœœ @j æœœ n b œœ@œ
3 3
b # œœœœœ œœœ n b œœ
3 3
‰ # œæœ æ @J æ æ
π F p F
T2
Cycle 55 Cycle 56
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2
& œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
J J J J J J J J J J J J
109 110 111
T Cycle 75 Cycle 76
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
T1
12 1 4 2 )
P6/7/11 7 8
11 9 10 12 P11/10/(8)/6/4/2) 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
pno
str [015]
[013579] [01468] [013579]
^ b œœ^ œ^ > j r j j r j œ^ œ œ^
b œœ^ # œœJ ≈ J ≈ b Jœ
& J ‰ ≈ # # œœœœœœ .... # œœœœœœ ... b œ
œ
j b n n œœjœ
œœ œ œœœœ # # # n # œœœ>œœœ ....
œ œ
œœœœ .. b b b b œœœ>œœœ œœœœœœ ‰ ≈ n œRœ œRœ ≈ b œJœ
J > .. b b œœœœ œœœœœœ n # n # œœœœœœ œœœœ # >œ J. b œ .. R
> > > ƒ
ƒ
233
P1/2/6/9 10 11 12 1 P10/9/7/5/3 2 3 4 5 6
P0/2/4/(6)/9 2 3 *6 4 5 7
ob/cl/hn/trpt
[0158] fl/ob/cl/bsn/hn/trpt/trbn/perc [02469] [02469]
3 3 [01357] [02479]
3 3
3
>
# œ >œœ > - - >j j j j 3 j b œœ- j3
& œœœæœœ Œ ‰ b b œœœ b b œœœœ n # # œœ-œ # n œœ ‰ ‰ œœœœœ b b b œœœœœ # # n n œœœœœ # # # # # œœœœœ œœœœœ n œœœœœ œœœœœ n œœœœ œœœ b b œœ œœœœœ n n œœœœ œœœœ œ
œ œœ b b œœœ œœœœœ b œœœ
3 3 3
œ- - J œ œ n b n œœœœ
>
p f ƒ f ƒ F ƒ Ï f
T2
Cycle 57
3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œJ œ Jœ œ J J J J J J J J J J
112 113 114
3 Supercycle #20
Cycle 77 U Cycle 78 Cycle 79
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3
J J J J J J J JJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
P11/1/6 3 2 4 5 6 P3/2/10 3 4 5 6 7 8
cl/bsn/hn/cb picc/ob/cl/xylo
T1 [027]
9 10 11
Ï
P10/1 10 11
^j ^ f
j [015]
trpt/trbn
^j ^ ^
^j ^r r ^j œœ œr > r >j j > >
# œ œœœ ≈ b œ œ n # œœœœ ≈ œ ≈ b œœ œœœ ‰ ‰ >
# œœœ r j
œ j ≈ # œj.
& # œ b n œœœ # œœ ..
b b œœ œœ œ# œ œ
œ œ bœ
b b œœœ ... œ œ œœœ b b œœœ .. œœœ .. n rœ
. . # œœ- œœœ bb œœœ œœœ # œjœ..
œœ œ b œ œœ ≈ Œ Œ ≈ œ # œœ œ œœ #œ. œœœ ... r r œj.
œ b œœ # œ b œœ n n œœœ
œ œ œ # œœ .. n b œœ œœ b b œœ- œ . œ
ƒ ‰ ≈ œ œœ œ .
[9]
> - J- b œ .
[9] [036] [4]
-
[9]
>
pno
>
bsn/hn/cb
> > [0247]
Melodic Dom. 7th Chord ƒ f p
f
P7/10 9 10 11 12 1 4 7 11
f
[014589] P0/3 8 10 11 12 1 2
P10/2 6 7 8 2 3
fragment ( P0/3 11 9 10 3 6)
( P4/7 11 12 1 3 8 7)
( P2/5 1 4 12 2 3 6 5 12 ) ( P11/3 9 10 11 )
( P10/1 7 5 4 6 2 11)
9-10-11-12 unit accented ( P1 12 8 10 8
234
P10/3 4 10 1 2 11 1
9-10-11-12 unit fragment P3/5 9 10 11 12 3
9-10-11-12 unit P4/2/11/9 9 10 11 12 1 3 8 7 pno ( P3/8 10 8 9 12 6 9 )
( P0/10/7/5 3 8 10 11 12 1 2) [037][0257]
[0358] [0237] [027] [015]
f
str [027] [2]
8
P8/6/3/1 12 1 3 8 10 11 4) [0157] 3
3 3 3
>3 >
str [0257]
> >
3
ƒπ
3
> b >œ n œœ > #œ œœ
# œœœœ b n œœœ b b b œœœœ œœœ n œœ n n n œœœœ b œœœœ œœ trpt/trbn ‰ ‰ # # œœ@jœ b œœœ n œ œœ œ b b b œœœœ ‰‰ ‰ # n n œœœœ n œœ # # # œœœ n n œœœ n n œœ# # œœœ ‰‰
b œœ ˙˙æ˙˙
˙ œœœœœ# œnœn b œœœœœn œœœ ˙˙˙˙˙
3 3
œœœœœ # b # n œœœœœ œœœœœ
3
& œœ ‰ ‰ ‰ b œ œœ # œœ œœ b œœ œœ œ b œ
bœ œ
3 3 3
æ @J J
@
3
æ æ
3 3
bb œœ-œ
- J - J- ‰œ b œ # œœ œœ ‰ æ‰ # œœœ
3 3 3
ƒ J J ƒπ ƒπ
[6] [037]
[01367]
T2 [014589] ob/cl/bsn
fragment
f ƒ p
P10/4 3 4 5 6 7 8
p
P3/7/10 10
str P11/0/3/5/6 7 8 9
Cycle 58 Cycle 59
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œ Jœ œ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
115 116 117 118
Supercycle #21
Cycle 80 V Cycle 81 Cycle 82
3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3
& œJ . œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ.
J J JJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
Hex [014589] P2/4/7/11 8 10 11 12 1 3 8 10 7
'pivot' P10/0/3/7 1 3 8 10 11 12 1 3 2
[0347] tetrachord to P3
P6/8/11/3 11 12 1 3 8 10 11 12 4
T1 P5/6/10/0/1 11 12 1 10
str
( P0/1/5/7/8 12 2 3 4) [0358]
F
12 1 picc/br/glock/cb P7/11 2 5 4 6 7 9
[01378] >œ > œ
œ
j r j j j j cl/bsn/cb b b œœœ b œœœ# n # # œœœœ #>œ n œœœ œœœœ b b œœœ b œœœ œœœ
‰ r j j bœ # œœœ œ bœ
& œ . b b œœ œœ Œ ≈ œjœ . bb œœœœ ... ≈≈b b œœœœœ ....n n # # n œœœœœ .... j j r j j r r # œœ
œ œ œ
œ # œœœœœ ...
.
bœ . b n œœœ ... >
œ .. > . > . # œœ œœ b œœ œ b b œœ œœ œœ .. œœ .. # œ œ p # # œœ œœ
[4]
> bœ nœ œ >
[02458]
J- J
ƒ
fl/ob/cl/trpt/glock
ƒ ƒ Ï ƒ
3 10 3 9 11 10 1)
p
( R.H.top P9
f
7 9 10 9 6 3 8 4)
P8/6/4/3/0 7 8
( P3 11 10 9 10 3 6 2 1)
( R.H.top P9 6 8 9 7 11 )
235
R.H.mid P10 2 4 3 6 7 7 9 8
L.H. P10 2 R.H.top
12 11 1 3 ( L.H.top P8
12 3 6 4 2 3 5)
5
( P0/5 8 7 6 6 9)
( L.H. P4 8 5 7 4 6) ( P0 3 10 9 2 11 7 5 6 ) P1/5/8/0 5
L.H. P6 1 3 5 2 4 6 7 8 9 10 11
bottom P6 4 10 8 11 12
'pivot' bottom [027] [037] [027] [024] pno
[026] [024] [0137] [025] [015] [0247]
to P6 [027] [3] [037][027] [037] [026] [0158]
3 3 3 3 3
> >
3
> > > >3 >3
œ ‰ ‰‰ œ œ
bœ # nœ œ n œ b b œœœ b b œœœ # # n # œœœœ # # œœœ œœœ n œœœœ œœœœ# # œ>œœœ œœœœ œ >œ œ bœ œ
œ œœ
bœb œœœœ n œœœ œœbnb œœœœ b œœ b b œœœn # œœœ n œœn # œœœ œœœ ‰ ‰ ‰ œœœ# œœ b b œœœ #
n œœ œ œ J
œœœn # # œœœ œœœb n n œœœ
J J
œœœ# # n œœœœ œœœ n œœ
b œ ‰‰ J J J
3 3 3 3 3 3 3
˙˙˙˙ œœœœ J
& œœœœ b # œœœœœ ˙˙˙˙˙ œœœœœ # n œœœœ> ˙ œ ‰ ‰
3
æ œœ ƒπ @>Jœœ æ œœ b b œœœ œœ @J æ @J ƒ Ï f
3
œ b œœœ æœœœ
3
œ œ J ƒ π
3
-
3
J- J- ‰
T2
12 1 3
f
11
10 11
Cycle 60 Cycle 61
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
119 120 121 122
W Cycle 83 Cycle 84
3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ
( P10/2/5/7 8 9) 'pivot'
[014589] to P10 (cb: P10 12 3 11 2)
fragment
P1/5/(10) 10 11 12 *1 +P8 3 11
P5/4/2/10/8 4 5 6 7 8 P11/0/5 1
T1 [0358]
pno picc/trpt/trbn
pno/cb rim shot/tamb basco
[037]
[01379]
[016]
>>
> j
^j r
œ -r - r - ^
œ
≈ # œ n œœ b œœ b b>œœœ bb b b œœœœ
nœœœœœ œœœœœœ ‰ ≈# # œœœ œœœ b œ
n b œœœ œœœœ œj. œ . b >œ œ œœœ´
& # b œœœœœ œœœœœ# # œœ œœ œ J # œœ œœ ## œœœœ ...n n œœœ ..b b b œœœ œœœ # # œœœœ ... n œœ œœ œ œ # # œœœœ ... œœœœ ...n b n b œœœœ œœœœ b b b œœœœœ .... J
œ. œœœœœ .. J R J . # œJ .. n œ œ J. J R .
[0258]
R # œœJ ..
- J. Ï Î - - - R
> ƒ Ï
p bsn/br
p f p
P7/5/3/2/11 9 10 P3/1/10/7 4 5 6 7 8
P11/0/4/7 9 10 11 7 5 12 2 4 1
Hex [014589]
P6/8/11/1 12 1 3 8 10 11
236
P9/10/2/5 7 11 8 10 4 1 3 12 5
9-10-11-12 unit P2/4/7/9 9 10 11 12 1 3 8
P0/1/5/8 4 1 11 12 2 8 10 3 6
'pivot' ( P10/0/3/5 3 8 10 11 12 1)
( P4/5/9/0 2 8 1 3 7 11 12 10 9) to P5 str
picc/ob/cl [0257] ob/cl/bsn/hn
bsn/hn/str [024] [026]
3 3
3
> >
>œœ - œ- b œ- > # œœœb n œ>œœ n œœœ b œœ n >œ œ # œ
# œ œ n b b œœœ n œœœ n >œœb œœœ# n œœ- # >œœœ b œ- -œœ# n # œœœ b œ n œœ œœ œœœ > b b œœ
œ # # œ
œœ œ n œœ n œ j - >œ œ œ # >œ
‰‰ œ J
3 3 3 3
‰ œœœœ b œ
3 3
& b œœ # œœ œ b œœœn n œœ # œœœ œœ n œœœœb b œœœ - # # -œœ œœ n # œœœ- œœœ n # œœœ œœœb n œœ œœ œJœ # n œœ
J
3 3 3
3 3
b œœœ œœœ œJ œ J
f J 3
ƒ F ƒ Ï p ƒ
3 4 5 6 7 8
Ï
P9/11/1 2
ƒ 9-10-11-12 unit fragment
cb: P10 12 1 11 cb: P10 4 5 6
T2 (accented) P3/5/9 9 10 11 12 1 10
(accented)
'pivot'
to P10 ( P10/0/4 1 4 12 2 3 4
Cycle 62 Cycle 63
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
123 124 125 126
Supercycle #22 U-sequence: 5 6 4 6 5 6
X Cycle 85 Cycle 86
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
9-10-11-12 unit P2/6 12 1 P2/0 3 8 10 11
P10/2 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ( P10/8 12 1 3 8)
T1
( P6/10 3 8) P6/4 10 11 12 1 P1/10 3
2 3 4
hn/trpt trpt/trbn hn/trpt
[4] [10]
^ ^´ ^
œ œ b œœ´
# œœœ´ bœ n œ j
‰ ≈ J ≈ J ‰ Œ Œ ‰ b œœ # œœ b n œœ r r j b œ b œ œ- œ b>œ
& J J J J
œœ b b œœj.. œœ ..
Î R # œœ œœ n # œœ .. n œ b œ b œ. # œ œ b Jœ
œ R J
Full pitch series
f
P4 12 P0 12 6 8 3 ( P8 12
9 3 7 9 11 8 4 5
11 2 4 11 1 11 3 6
10 1 5 10 12 10) 2 7
pno/gl
1 1 8
marcatissimo [0358] [0158] [0147] [0158]
staccatissimo [01479] [0237]
sim. [0146]
237
martellato ´^ ´^ r
Pno.
^´ ´^j
Ó # œ j œœœœ ‰ ≈ ‰
& ‰ ≈ # n œœœœ Œ ‰ ‰ # # œœœ ‰ b œjœ Œ ≈ # ## œœœœ ≈ # n œœœ Œ
œ
cresc. poco a poco
œœœ #œ n b œœ
R œ J J
9-10-11-12 unit P8/9/1/3 12 1 3 8 10 11
Ï
P3/2/1/(0)/(11)/9/7/5 5 6 *7 *8 9 P4/5/9/11 10 11 12 1 3 8
str
pizz. ( P0/1/5/7 3 8 10 11 12 1
ww
[0123468T] [0123578]
[012468T] [0157]
3 3 [0123468T]
3 3 3 3 3 3
>j > >
b >œœ j ‰ ‰ j Œ j 3# œ- j j
& bœ
b b n b œœœœœ ‰ ‰# n # œœ
bœ # # œœœœœœ n n n bb œœœœœœœ ‰ b b n œœ ‰ # # b œœ œ ‰ b n b œœœœ œœœœ # # œœœ # œ œœœœ œœœœ j n œœ
œ œ
3
b œœœœœ n n œœœœœ - # # œœœ n œœœœ
> > b œœœ œœœ b n >œœ
7 Ï
T2 5)
ƒ Ï
Cycle 64 Cycle 65
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2
& œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
127 128 129
6 5 6 4 6 5 6
Cycle 87 Cycle 88
Y
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ
P6/2 3 8 10 11 12 2 3 1
9-10-11-12 unit P10/6 9 10 11 12 1 3 7 10 8

T1 P8/6/1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 P2/10 12 1 3 8 10 4 12 11
P4/7 3
picc/ob/cl ( P11/7 11 12 1 9 )
picc/bsn picc/bsn
4 5 6 7 8 [027] [4]
ƒ
[3]
- œ>œœ œœ œœ > b>œœ œœ- b n>œœ - # œ- n #>œœ - n œœ- #>œœ .. œœ
œ nœ #œ j j b b b œœœ- œœœ n # # œœœ ... œ œ # œœœ œœœ œœœ- b œœ œ n # œœ J ≈ Œ Œ ‰ J
& œ n œ œ œ #œ . #œ . R R J R J J
J > œ œ. œ. ƒ
P3 4 6 10 P11 4 5 10
f
12 4
3 7 1 3 6 1 ( P7 11 ) 3 5 10
2 8 12 2 7 12 2 6 8
(9) 1 4 9 1 8 9 1 7 9
12 5 11 12 11
[0158]
[01358] [01469] [01469] [016]
[01469] [0237] [01469] [0358] j
Pno.
œœ œ r
‰ ≈ # # œœœœœ ≈ ‰ ≈ b n n # œœœœœ Œ # # œœœ ‰ ‰ n b œœœœ ‰ b b n n œœœœ Œ œœœ ‰ ≈ b b b œœœœ ≈ ‰ ≈ b œ Œ
& b # œœœœœ b œ b œœ
cresc. molto
J J R J J J J
poco a poco con ped. ( P1/3/5/8/10 12 5 4 6 2 9 7 1 11 )
238
( P4/6/8/11/1 1 4 12 2 3 7 10 5 9 )
9-10-11-12 unit P6/8/10/1/3 9 10 11 12 1 3 8 7 2
P2/4/6/9/11 3 8 10 11 12 1 2 4
P10/0/2/5/7 12 1 3 8 10 11 4 7
( P7/9/11/2/4 4 1 5 8 6 11 9 12 10 )
4 P0/2/4/7/9 10 9 7 5 4 6 2 11 8
[02479]
7 str
3
> >
2) str
f >> > > > > >3 >
pizz.
>3 >
br/cb pizz
‰
3 3 3
œ œœ # # œœ n œ
j œ > b >œ > j 3 b b b b œœœœ n n n n œœœœœ b œœœ b œœœœœ b b b b œœœœœ # # n œœœ n # n œœœœœ # œœœœœ b n b œœœœ ‰
& œ ‰ b n n œœœœ ‰ ‰ j ‰ ‰ b b b œœœ
3
‰ b b œœœœ ‰ ‰ b œœœJ ‰ œœœ ‰ œœj ‰ ‰ œj ‰
œ ‰ # œœœ ‰ ‰ n b b œœœ ‰
3
nœ
3 3
œœœœ n b>œœ J J > # # œœ # # œœœ J J J ‰ n # œœœ ‰ ‰ n œœœ ‰
3 3
> # œœœ J
3
> > J
>ÿ
[0158]
Ï ÿ ÿ3 ÿ
[037]
f > > ÿ >
T2
>
Full pitch series P8/7/3/0 1 3 2 12 4 5 6 P8/0/3 7 8 9 10 11
( P1/0/5/8 9 1 12 11 10 ) ( P0 12 1
9-10-11-12 unit fragment
Cycle 66
3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
130 131 132
6 5 6 4 6 5 6 6 5
2 Supercycle #23
Z Cycle 89 Cycle 90 AA Cycle 91
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
P2/9 4 5 P6/9 4 5 6 7 8 P5/7/11 4 5 6 7 8
6 7 8 9 P0/5/7/(2)/(10) *3 4 *5 6 7 8
T1 5 6 7 8 trpt/trbn cl/trpt picc/cl P5/8/0 3 4 5 6
[0347] tetrachord str [9]
[7] [02479] [026] ob/cl/hn
P10
10 11 12 1
hn
> >
œœ b œœ .. œ¯ œ > b >œ n œ¯ ¯ n>œ . n>œ œ
b œœ b œ œœ
b œJ b œ œœ̄ œ¯ n>œ œ œ . œ. > b œœœœ # n # # œœœœœ b b œœ- -œ
n bb œœœœœ .... b b b b b œœœœœ .... b n œ. œ œ ‰
# œœœ b b œœœ¯ œ¯ n n >œœ .. œ . [037]
& R J bœ œ œ bœ . b b b œœœ n # nn œœœœ J J. ≈ ≈ œ œ b œœ J R J ‰
# œœ b œ . b œœ .. b>œœœ œœœ n n>œœ # # œœœ¯ n n œœœ¯
J J
R R J œ . # œ # œ œ- n œJ J
J - - R R œ
ƒ F P F ƒƒ f ƒ f F
π Í Ï F p P p f p
P2 12 11 12 ( P1 2 )
12 (1) P10 11 4 4 10
4 6 10 P6 11 8
9 2 3 4 5 3 7
3 7 7 10 9
11 1 5 3 6 5 8
5 8 8 1 11
10 12 6 2 7 6 9
2 9 12 10
[01347] [013] [0258]
[0247] [0137] [01369] [014] [015] [01258] [0137] [0136]
j r [0347] œ
Pno. ≈ bb œœœ b œœœœ ‰ Œ
& b œœœœœ ‰ ≈ ‰ ≈ # nn œœœ Œ ‰ # # œœœœ ‰ b nbnœœœœœ # bb œœœœœ ‰ ≈ n n# œJœœ ≈ ‰ ≈ # n œœœœ Œ
J #œ
sempre cresc.
J
tutta la forza con parossismo estremo
J
# b b œœœœ ‰ ≈ # n œœœJ ≈ ‰ ≈ n n œœœ Œ
J J R
(con ped.)
J R
9-10-11-12 unit
9-10-11-12 unit P4/8/11 9 10 11 12 1 3 8 7 9-10-11-12 unit
239
P6/(9)/1 9 10 11 12 1 3 8 *10
( P0/4/7 3 8 10 11 12 1 2) P2/4/7/11 9
( P2/(5)/9 3 10 11 12 1 *3 ) 10 11 12 1
8
P8/0/3 12 1 3 8 10 11 4
( P10/(3)/7 12 1 3 8 10 11 *12 ) ( P10/0/3/7 3 8 10 11
P5/9/0 4 1 5 8 6 11 9 12 [014589] P0/7
9 10 11 12 1 9 7 5 6 2 *9 ) ( P6/8/11/3 12 1 3 8
fragment ( P0/(3)/7 10 4
( P10/2/5 10 9 7 5 4 6 2 11 )
picc/ob/cl picc/ob
P
[7] str [037] [02479] [0358]
p p
[037]
P
3
3 3 3
3
-
3 3
> -3 > - 3 >3 - - > -
3
p> - - 3 > > - > - > -
str 3
> >
pizz.
œ # œœœ
‰ ‰ # n œœ n œœœ b b œœœ œ
œ # œœœ # œœœ n œœ ‰‰ Œ ‰ œœ œ œj œ # œ n b œœœ
b œœœ œ # œœ # œœœ œ
b b œœ # œ
œœœœœ ‰ ‰ ‰ œœœœ bn œœ # # œœœ œ n œœ
# œ bœ n œœ b b œœ
œœ œ ‰ ‰‰ # œœ
n œœ b œœ # œ # n œœœ œœ
& œ b n œœœ # œœ
œœ n # # œœœœœœœ n # œœ œœ # b œ
# b b œœ œ n b œœœœ œ n œœ b œ nœ
3
‰‰ J # œœ œœ
3 3
œœ ‰b b b œœœ ‰ ‰# # n œœœ œœœœ ‰ œœœœ b b n œœœ
J # # œœœœœ ‰# # œœœœœ ‰
3 3 3 3
‰ J ‰
3 3 3
J ‰ ‰ J
3 sim. 3 3 3
J J
‰ b œJ ‰ ‰b n œœJ ‰ J J ‰ ‰ # œJ ‰‰ n œJ ‰ ‰ J ‰ 3J ‰ ‰ œJ ‰ ‰ Jœ ‰ ‰ J ‰
[5]
>
[5]
> >
[012468T] [015]
> >
[037]
> > >3
[0257] [037]
>ÿ
ww/br/pizz/tamb basco
T2 10 12 )
Ï
12 ( P8 8 ƒ
3 ) 11 12 1 2 3 P0/4/7 4 5 P(0)/(2)/(5)/(7) 7 *8 9 4 P0/(7) 3 8 10 *11 12 1
P0/11/10/8/6/4/2 9-10-11-12 unit P8/(5) 12 1 3 *8 10 11
Cycle 67 Cycle 68 ( P4/(1) 9 10 11 12 1 3 8)
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
133 134 135 136
6 6 5 6 4 6 5 6
Supercycle #24
Cycle 92 BB Cycle 93
3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3
& œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ.
9-10-11-12 unit
9-10-11-12 unit P3/5/10 9 10 11 12 1 3 8 6
P8/10/3 8 9 10 11 12 1 3 8
( P11/1/6 3 8 10 11 12 1 5)
P8/10/1 3 4 5 6 7 8 ( P4/6/11 1 6 3 8 10 11 12 1 2 3 )
T1 P10/11/2/4 4 5 6 7 8
( P7/9/2 12 1 3 8 10 11 9) 12 8 4 12 )
bsn/hn/vln ( P0/2/7 11 5 1 3 10 11
str
7 8 fl/ob/vln [027] [025] str [027] [0146] [013568]
[0358]
[0247]
> >> > >>
# >œ œ >œ > >>
œ >
> œ>œœ b b n œœœ- >œœ œœ- >œ b b œœ- - n >>œ # >œ n >œœ
b b b b œœœœ .... # n œœœœ œœœœ
‰ œ>œœ # n œ>œœ n œœœ œœœ n bb œ>œœ b b œœœ n## œ>œœ >œœ ‰ ≈ # # œœ œœ n œœ œœœ n œœœ # # œ>œœ ...
nœ R R J œœœ œœœ œ œ œœ b œ b b œœœ # n œœ # œœ n œ
‰ ≈
b n b œœ>œœ n œ>œ b n b œœœ n # n œœœœ # n œœœ>œœœ
n # œœ
& J J R J
R p
(1)
F
P9 11
ƒ f ƒ
10 9
f Sf
4
Sf
2 3 7 3 10
12 1 ( P5 11 4
1 5 8 2 11
11 12 10 ) 5 [6]
12 6 9 1
[5] [0247] [0136] [3] [025] [3]
[0137]
^^
^^´
j j r j j
´j
Pno. ‰ ‰ Œ j œ j ≈
& b œœ n## œœœœ ≈ nbbœœœœ ≈ ‰ ≈ # œœ ‰ ‰ n œœœ ‰ # œœ Œ #œ ‰ ≈ œ
ancora più feroce!
b œœœœ Œ
J
P0/10/4/7 9 12 10 7 4 1
3 P3/(5)/9 [014589] P0/3 10 11 12 1 3 P5/7/11/2 1 2 4 5 6 3
12 1 2 3 4) 5 6 *7 8 9 10 11 fragment
cl/trpt fl/ob/cl/hn
10 11 4 12 ) ww/br/str
240
[3]
F Sf
[0258]
Sf
[026]
p Ï Sf Sf Sf
[6]
3 3
>
3
¯3
3
> >´ ´ >´ ´ > > ¯ ¯ ¯3
3
- > - -3 >> > >3 >> >> >3 >>
j 3 b œ
Œ ‰ n œ œ œ
œœœ
œ œ œœ b œœœ # n # œœœ b b œœ # œ j #
# # œœ œœœ œ
œœ ‰ ‰ œ œœ b œœ b œœj œœ œœœœ # n œœœ b b œœ b b œœœ # # # œœœœ œ ‰
& b b œœœ œœœ œ n œ # œœ œœ # n œœ n # œœœ œœœ b n n œœœ œ b œœ # œ n n œœ # œ b œœœ
œœ œ œœ œ # œ # œœ # œœ œ
n œ bœ
‰ # # œœ
3
‰ ‰ # # œœ ‰ œœ
3
‰ # œœ ‰ b œœ œ ‰ ‰ J ‰ ‰ b œœ
3
‰ Jœ ‰ ‰ # œJ ‰ b b b œœœœ b œ œ ‰ œœ
3
œœ ‰ ‰
3 3
J J
3 3 3
J J J J J
3
J ‰ J ‰ ‰ J ‰ ‰ J ‰
[5] [5]
>ÿ ÿ ÿ 3 >ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ3 ÿ ÿ
>
picc/ob
p [4]
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 *11 12 1 *10
T2 ( P7/(2) 10 1 4 ) *12 2 3 *4 5
9-10-11-12 unit fragment P1/5 9 10
11 12 1 4 7 10 3
P5/9 12 1 3 8 2 4 12 10
P9/1 3 8 10 11 7 2 3 12
( P8/0 1 4 12 2 3 6 5 4 7)
( P10/2 12 10 11 8)
Cycle 69 ( P2/6 3 12 1 11 ) Cycle 70
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
137 138 139
6 5 6
Cycle 94 CC Cycle 95
3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3
& œJ . œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ.
9-10-11-12 unit
P7/11 8 10 9 11 12 1 (3) ( P6/10/1 12 1 3 8 10 11 4 )
P11/3 11 12 5 1 3 8 (10) ( P10/2/5 3 8 12 1
10 11 2)
T1 6
P3/7 1 3 8 10 11 (12)
9-10-11-12 unit P2/6/9 9 10 11 12 1 3 8 7 P8/10/2/5 6 8 9 10
picc/str pizz P5/9/0 6 7 8 5
cl/trpt bsn/br
[013578] [013579] [037]
[4] str [0258]
bsn/trpt/vla
>j
>j >
j > >> > -
>´ >´ ´‰ ´ œœœœœœ # # œœœœ n œjœ #
# n œœœœœœ # œœœ>œœœ >œœ - b>œ
œ b b œœœ b œœ # œ- œœ- n n n œœœ b œœœ >œ ≈ ‰ # n œœ- b>œ œœ b>œ .
b>œœ ...
œ # n n œ>œœœ œœœœ # # >œœœ n n n œœœ- # n # œœœœ
b œœ œ´ # œœ´ # œœ œœ b b œœœœ ≈ ≈ J ≈ # œœ n œ n œœ œ b œœ œ b œœ .. J R R n œ b œ
& bœ # œœ n œœ J R J
Î p f ƒ
6/5/3/1/11/(9)
*4 5 6 7 8
pS SP
P0 6 8 1 6
9 12 1
7 8 7
( P3/(10) *12 ) 1 2 P3(8) 3 *4
[1] [4] [1]
[7]
[5]
3 3
3
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
^´ ^^
´r ^ ^^
j j
Pno.
´j ^^´
‰ ≈ ‰ ‰ ‰ œ´ œ ‰ j ‰
& ‰ ≈ # œœ Œ b œœ ≈ n œj ≈ b œœ´ Œ # œœ ‰ bb œœ ‰ ‰ œ ‰ ‰ b b œœ ‰ nœ
( P5 4 5 3
R J J
) sim.
241
3 2 3
‰ ‰ J Jœ >ÿ meno ƒ
>ÿ
P8/10/0/3
ÿ Î Ï ƒ
9-10-11-12 unit P10/0/(4) 1 2 3 4 *5 6 7 8 9 10 11 (with gran cassa)
>
P4/8
Îf
9 10 11 12 1 3 (8)
P8/0 12 1 3 8 10 (11)
P0/4 3 8 10 11 12 (1)
P2/4/7/11 2 3 4 P4/6/8/11 1
ob/cl/trpt picc/ob/cl/hn/trpt
bsn/hn ww/str str
pizz.
[026]
Ï
[4] [025]
ƒ
[0247]
f
[0358] [024579] [0247]
Ï
3 3 3 3 3
3
>3 ¯ ¯ >
3
>3 ¯ ¯ >3 > > > - - - > - - ^ ^ ^ >3
# j j œ Œ j
# # # œœœ n œœœœ # # œœjœ œœœ œœ ‰ œœœ ‰ b b b œœœœ
n
‰ # œœ œœ b œœ b œœ # œœ n # œœ b n œœœ n œœœ b œœœ n # # œœœ #œ œ œœœœ œœœœ b n n b œœœœ n n # œœœœ œ
n œœœ # œœ Œ
b œœ œ # œœ
b œ ‰ # # œœœœ ‰
& b b œœ œ œ n œ œ
‰ œœœ b œ # œ # œœœ n œœœ n œœœ
3
b œ ‰ ‰ nœ ‰ # œœ ‰ ‰
3 3 3 3
J # # œœ
‰ ‰ J ‰ ‰ nœ
3 3
‰ J ‰ ‰ œJ ‰ ‰ J ‰ J Î
3
J
3
J J
[7] [7]
> 3> > >
[037]
>> >
>
T2 6 7 *8 *9 10 11 *12 1 *3 picc/ob/cl
( P3 8 10 11 *12 )
Sf
Sf
9-10-11-12 unit fragment P9/0/4 9 10 11 12 1 3
Cycle 71
3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œJ J J J J J J J J J J J
140 141 142
Cycle 96
3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ
P3/7/10 10 11 12 1 2 3 6 4
11 [014589]
fl/ob/cl P8/(6) 6 7 8 9 10 *11 fragment P(11)/1 10 11
T1
9 ob/trbn
P3/(5) *4 6 7 8 10 11
cl/hn
F p
cl/bsn [2]
p
[2] [013]
-j[037]-
> - > - - > -
œ
# œœœœ... œœ j r j -j ˘ . . ˘ . . -r j >´ ´
# œœ. n œ œœœ b b œœœ œœœ b b œœœ # n œœ # n œœœ
œ j # œœ œœ œœ .. bb œœ ..
-r r œ œœ n œœ b n œœ
& œœ ‰
œœ œœ
≈ # œœœœ œœœœ
œœœœœ n n œœ b b œœb n b œœœœ b œœ n # œœ œ
n œœ ≈ b b œœJ ‰ Œ
p F J- -
[0358]
R- R
str
Ï
5 P3/10 6 7 8 9 P7/9/0/4 2 4
3
[5]
3 3
P3 10 11 12 1
3 3
j j j j 3 3 3 3
Pno.
j j j
242
& œ
#œ ‰ œœ́ ‰ ‰ # # œœ ‰ ‰ œœ ‰ ‰ n b œœ ‰
œ ‰ ‰ œ ‰ ‰ j ‰ ‰
bœ ‰
J π ∏ œ Øp
f menof Fÿ Pÿ psim. Ø
9-10-11-12 unit fragment
P8/10 8 9 10 11 12 1
picc/ob
2 3 4 p ƒ
[10]
3
3
> > > bœ œ - j 3
# # # # œœœœ n œœœœ b n œœœœ nœ œ œ œ œ bœ œ Œ
‰ J ‰ ‰ J ‰ œ œ œ œ
3 3
& J J J œ
3
‰ # œœ œ b œ œœ œ
b œ n œœ
3
J fl < < b œœ b œœ n # œœ # œœ-
‰
3 3
fl < < fl3 . .
T2 picc/trpt/cb [2]
P7/9 5 7 8 9 10 11 12
Cycle 72
p
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
J J J J J J J J
143 144
CODA Supercycle #25
DD Cycle 97 Cycle 98
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
P7/9 12 P2/5/(10) *7 8 *9 10 11 12 P9/1/4 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
*12 1 3 3 10 11 1 2 3 4 5
str P0/(8) 7 6
ob/trpt ob/cl/trpt
T1 hn/vc
[014] [037]
p p ƒ
[11] [10] [10]
Ï p ƒ f
π
[4]
>´ ´ >>j r ˘ . . ˘ . ˘ . . > > > > > > - - >j
œ œ ≈ ‰ œ bœ œ œ b œ b œj. n œœ b œ > . . n œj. œ # # œ
œ n
œœ b b œœœ n œœ œ œ .
œ œ .
œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ n œ
bœ œ œ nœ nœ bœ œ . ≈ Œ œ
b œ b b œœ n œœ # œœ n # œœ n œœ .. # # # œœœ n œœ œ n œ œœ œœ # œœ . ≈ ‰ # œ œ
& b œ‰ # œ b b œœœ œœœ n n œœœ œœ œœ œœ b b œœœ ... œ #œ œ # œ œœ ‰ . #
#œ œ n # œœ b œœ n œœ œ œ œ
œ œœ œœ
bœ J ≈ Œ œœ ... # œœœ
J œœœ œœœ n œœœ œœ J
[026] [027] bsn/hn/trbn
R J R ÿ ÿ ÿ
[025]
> < < > < < > J- - >ÿ
picc/cl/bsn [4]
> ÿ ÿ â
f ƒ p f p trpt/trbn
P11/1/(6) *2 4 5 6 7 8 11 P(11)/(1)/(4) 5 *6 7 8
p f
P4/8 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
P9 1 2 11 10 2 1
3 3 3 3 3
Pno. ‰ j ‰ ‰ ‰ Œ Ó ∑
243
& j ‰ j ‰ #œ j ‰ j ‰ j ‰
œ œ
perderdosi
œ #œ œ
P3/5 11 12 2 3 4 6 P4/(11) *4 5 6 7 8
P2/(3)/(7)/(10) picc/cl picc/bsn
P(5)/0/(4)/9 7 *10 9 *11 12 *1 [5]
2 *3 5 6 *7 8 9 *10 11 [2] str [6]
F ƒ
3 3 3
str [0158]
>
3
>
[0158] [0147] [0158] 3
p - - >
[0158] [0258] [0158][0158]
- 3 >> [0158] j j
[0258] [0258]
- > - œ œ j
ob/cl
œ ‰ œ bb œœ œœ
œ œ œ œ ‰
>œœ # œœœ- b b >œœ œ- [0157]
œ b œ n œ- n # # # œ>œœœ b n n n œœœœ n # œœœœ- n >œœ œœ œ>œ - bœ
- [0358] œœ > œ œ
# œœ œœ
œœ œœ b b œœ n n œœ b œ >œœ - [0158] > [0158] # œœ
œœ œ # # œœœ b n n œœœ >œœ
3 3 3
J œœ œœ
3 3
& ‰ b œœ# n ##œœœœ n œœœ- n # œœœœ #œœœœ nœœœœ ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰ œœ # œœ n œœ J
3
œ bœ P
‰ œ
3
‰ ‰ #œ ‰ ‰ J ‰ œ ‰ bœ Œ
3
p f J J ‰
3
J
3 3
J ‰ Jœ ‰ ‰ Jœ
str pizz.
>3 > >
[4] [3] [4]
> > > >
T2
F ƒ
P7 1 4 5
Ï
P8/0 *9 10 11 *12 *1 *2 4
Cycle 73 Cycle 74 9-10-11-12 unit fragment
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
145 146 147
Cycle 99 EE Cycle 100
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
P(5)/7/(0) *1 12 *11 *2 *12 *11

P7/(3)/(9)/(1) 5 *4 *6 *9 *3 *2 1 *12 P(2)/3/(5) *12 *10 9 11 *7
*9 *10
P(1)/(8)/(4) 7 8 *4 *12 *2
T1 P(11)/3/(1) *11 *12 *7 *9 10 P(5)/(3)/(7) *12 *2 *3 *4 *5 *6
picc/ob/cl
P (4)/(10)/0 1 2 *4 *7 *9 *10 11 *12
br
p ƒ
ob/hn/cb
cl/hn/cb picc/cl/bsn
[014]
ƒ
[0148] [0268]
f [016][027][016] [026] [025] p
str [0258]
str [015] [027] [0148] [025] [014] [015][024] [025]
[025] [015] [0268] [013]
[3] [5] >
[0258] [0258] [026]
[025] [024]
´ ´ ´ >´ ´ ´ [037] [036] [037]
¯ ¯ œ œ >´ >´ ´ [025] [026] > [026] [026] > [0157] - >#œ [014]
œ œ # œ b œ
œ n œœ œ ≈ ‰
œœ # œ œœ œœœ # œ n œœ œ #œ œ œ # œ
œ œœœ b œœœ œœœ b œœ >œœ # œ>œ > # œœœ œœ # œ>œ œœœ œœ- # b œœœœ œœœœ b œœœœ œ>œœ b œœœœ œ>œ œœœ b œœœ > b œœœ œœ b œœœ # œœ n œœœ # œ>œœ œ
n œ œ œ b œ n œ b œœ
& #œ
œœ n œœ œœœ # # # œœœœ œœ n œœ
œ b œœ œ œ # œœœ n œœœ # œœœ n œ b œœ # œ n œ #œ bœ n œœ
œ ≈ ≈ œ ≈ R ‰ π
R R π F π f ƒ
str
> > P f
> Ï
f ƒ
P0 2 1 12
244
P7/(9)/(5)/(0) 2 *3 *4 12 P(10)/8/(1) 5 6 *7 8 10 *11 2
P(10)/2/(5) 11 12 *1 *9 6
P10/(7)/(11) *1 2 6 *4 5
( P4/(6)/(2)/(9) 1 ) *2 *4 *5
vla P(10)/(2)/4/(7) 1 2 *3 *4 *5
P3/(10)/(6) 4 5 *6 *7 *9 *10
bsn/str
[0146]picc/ob/cl picc/cl/bsn
[0257] [0247][0257][0258] [026] picc/ob/trbn [0147]
[0247] [037] [048]
p
[0246] 3 [025] 3 bsn/trpt/gl [025] [014] [024] [036] [037] str
3 [014] [0258]
[026]
>
[036] [037]
>
[037] 3
>3 - [0257] >
>´ ´ j Œ > œ
œ >
‰ œœœœ œ
- >œ # # œœ œ b n œ>œœ n b œœœ b œœ n # œœœ b # œœœ >œ n œœ n œ b œœ œœ # œœœ >
œ b œ
œ œ œ # œœ œœœœ œœœœ b œœœœ # œœœœœ # äœ >œ # œ # œœ #œ œ
3 3 3
3 3
& œR œœœ b œœœ # n œœ ‰ # œœ n œœœ # # œœœ n œœœ œœœ œœ œœ # # œœœ # œœ # œœ œ n œœ b œœ # œœœœ œœœœb b œœœ # œœœœ
œœ
œ ‰ 3 3 3
3
F
3
‰ œJ ‰ ‰ ‰ Jœ ƒ ‰ π
3
J ÿ >ÿ ÿ π π
> > >
T2
F ƒ
P7 2 12 1
Cycle 75
3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
& œJ œ J J J J J J J J J J J
148 149 150
Supercycle #26
Cycle 101 Cycle 102 FF Cycle 103
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3
& œJ Jœ . œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ. ∑
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J JJ
vln 2 P2 4 6 5 12 10 9
P(0)/4 1 2 4 7 *5
P(1)/5 8 7 11 1 *5 *4 vc 12 10 9 6 4 5 +vla/vc
T1 P3/(11) 10 *9 *11*12 *4 5 cl P2 12 1 2 11 3 +P(1)
P(3)(7) *4 5 6 *10 *11 *9 9-10-11-12 unit fragment
P3(7) *10 9 *11 *6 5 cb P3 12 11 9 6 5
P4/(10) *10 *11 9 *12 3
P(9)/(6) 12 1 *2 *3 *4 *5 3 *8 *7 *1 *12 *2
picc/cb cl/cb str

ob/cb bsn/hn trpt/trbn vln 2/vc cl/hn [015]
[4] vln 2/vc
[025] [027] picc/cb [037]
[7] [7][8][11] [8] [7] [9] [10] [037] [024]
[3]
[2] [3] [4] [7] [8] [6] [9] [7] [6] [024]
[3][4] [2] [8] [6] [5] [6] [10][8] [4] [10] [9]
[4] G.P.
> > > b œ >œœ [3][2] [5] > >
œ œ > b œ > n >
œ œ œœ
>œœ œœ œ # œœ .. œœ # œ œ œ >œœ# œœ b œ n œœ œ # œ n œ b œ b œ # œ œ œ œ œ #>œ # œ œ œ œœœ œœœ # œœœ n œœ œœ œ # œœœ # œœœ
‰Œ ∑
& b œœ œ # œœ J œœ œ œœ œœ # œ # œ œ œœ b œœ œ
œœ œœ # œ œ œ #n œœ œ œ b œ # œ œ œ b œ œ b œ n œ # œ b œ # œ n œ œ
> b œ > # # œœ > bœ > #œ > œ œ # œ œœ b œ bn œœ
f π ∏ p F π> ∏> ∏ Ø
π> > ∏ ∏
( P9/5 3 12 10 9)
245
P(4)/(0) *2 4 3 1 *6 5 P3/11 6 5 9 10
P(0)/(3)/(7) *6 *5 *4 *12 *1 P3(7) 4 2 *1 *3

*7 *8 cl/bsn P1/(2) 12 1 *2
[4] P(3)/7 8 7 *1 4 P(5)/(8) *11 *10 *12 1
trpt/trbn *4 5
[0258] picc/cl/cb [037][016] vln 1/vln 2
[0248][4] [3] picc/cb
vln 1/vla trpt/trbn
> >j
[8] [026][036] œ œ œ > œ ‰
-
>œ b œ > œ- [2]- n[3] œ œ b œœ # œ bb œœ œœ b œ # >œ œ >œ œ vln>1/vla œ b>œœ >
œ # œ >œ - - b>œ b œ bn œœ
# œœ œœ # œ >œ œœ >œ # # œœœ # n œœ
b œœ œ b œ œ ‰‰ Œ ∑
3
3
œ b œ œœ œ œ b œ n œ b œ œ # œ œ œ b œ n ## œœœœ œ b œ # œœ œœ œ œ # œ b b œœ b œ œ n œ
3
& œ b œœœ œœ # œ n œœ # œ
3 3 3
bœ
3 3 3 3 G.P.
‰ #œ œ œ # œ n œ
3 3
[9] [8] [7] [0135] [7] [4] [3] [4] [8] [7] [8] [7]
>3
[7] [8] 3 3 [10] [1] [10]
π π > >
[7] [6] [7] [6] [8]
F
trpt/trbn
P ∏ ∏
∏ ∏ Ø
∏ ∏
T2 P(5)/(10) 2 *1 12 P(5)(9) 1 *2 11 *7 *8
P(0)/(11) *9 10 *11
Cycle 76 Cycle 77
2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
& œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ ∑
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
151 152 153 154 155
Bibliography
Alegant, Brian, and Donald McLean. “On the Nature of Enlargement.” Journal of Music
Theory 45, no. 1 (Spring 2001): 31-71.
Aluas, Luminita. “Visible and Audible Structures: Spatio-Temporal Compromise in

Ligeti’s ‘Magyar Etüdök.’ ” Tempo, New Series, No. 183 (December 1992): 7-17.
Arom, Simha. African Polyphony and Polyrhythm. Translated by Raymond Boyd, Martin
Thom, and Barbara Tuckett. Preface by György Ligeti. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1985.
Bauer, Amy. Ligeti’s Laments: Nostalgia, Exoticism and the Absolute. Burlington:
Ashgate Publishing Company, 2011.
Belk, Jim. “Notes – Julia Sets and the Mandelbrot Set.” Resource for “Math 323:
Dynamical Systems” course. Bard College. Accessed June 18, 2015.
http://math.bard.edu/belk/math323/NotesJuliaMandelbrot.pdf.
Bernard, Jonathan. “Ligeti's Restoration of Interval and Its Significance for His Later
Works.” Music Theory Spectrum, Vol. 21, No.1 (Spring 1999): 1-31.
———. “Rules and Regulation: Lessons from Ligeti’s Compositional

Sketches.” In György Ligeti: Of Foreign Lands and Strange Sounds, edited by
Louise Duchesneau and Wolfgang Marx, 149-168. Woodbridge: Boydell &
Brewer, 2011.
Bird, Richard. Chaos and Life: Complexity and Order in Evolution and Thought. New
York: Columbia University Press, 2003.
Burkhart, Charles, and Heinrich Schenker. “Schenker’s ‘Motivic Parallelisms.’ ” Journal

of Music Theory Vol. 22, No. 2 (Autumn 1978): 145-175.
Christensen, Louis. “Conversation with Ligeti at Stanford.” Numus-West, No. 2 (1972):

17-20.
Clendinning, Jane Piper. “The Pattern-Meccanico Compositions of György Ligeti.”

Perspectives of New Music 31/1 (Winter 1993): 192-234.
Curry, Justin and Curran Kelleher. “Gödel Escher Bach: A Mental Space Odyssey.”
Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology lecture series, filmed
summer 2007. http://ocw.mit.edu/high-school/humanities-and-social-
sciences/godel-escher-bach/video-lectures.
Devaney, Robert. “The Mandelbrot Set, the Farey Tree, and the Fibonacci Sequence.”
The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 106, No. 4 (April 1999): 289-302.
246
Drott, Eric. “The Role of Triadic Harmony in Ligeti's Recent Music.” Music Analysis
22/3 (2003): 283-314.
Duchesneau, Louise, and Wolfgang Marx, eds. György Ligeti: Of Foreign Lands and
Strange Sounds. Rochester, NY: The Boydell Press, 2011.
Engebetson, Mark. “György Ligeti’s Piano Concerto: An Analysis of the First

Movement.” DMA diss., Northwestern University, 2000.
Fauvel, John. Music and Mathematics, from Pythagorus to Fractals. Edited by

Raymond Flood and Robin Wilson. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.
Floros, Constantin. György Ligeti: Beyond Avant-garde and Postmodernism. Translated

by Ernest Bernhardt-Kabisch. New York: Peter Lang, 2014.
Follin, Michel, director. “György Ligeti: Un Portrait.” Film written by Arnaud de

Mezamat, Judit Kele, and Michel Follin. Paris: Artline Films for Arte, 1993.
Gann, Kyle. The Music of Conlon Nancarrow: Music in the Twentieth Century. Edited by
Arnold Whittall. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
Griffiths, Paul. György Ligeti. London: Robson, 1997.
Hofstadter, Douglas. Gödel, Escher, Bach. New York: Random House, 1979.
Holmes, Thom. Electronic and Experimental Music: Technology, Music, and Culture.
4th ed. New York: Routledge, 2012.
Jacquette, Dale. “Diagonalization in Logic and Mathematics.” In Handbook of

Philosophical Logic, 2nd ed., Vol. 11, edited by Dov Gabby and Franz Guenthner,
55-147. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004.
Jersey, Bill and Michael Schwarz, directors. “Hunting the Hidden Dimension.” Nova /
Public Broadcasting Service video. Boston: WGBH Educational Foundation and
the Catticus Corporation, PBS Airdate October 28, 2008.
Hartmuth Kinzler. “Decision and Automatism in ‘Désordre,’ 1re Etude, Premiere Livre.”
Interface 20, no. 2 (1991): 88-124.
Kramer, Jonathan. “The Fibonacci Series in Twentieth-Century Music.” Journal of

Music Theory, Vol. 17, No. 1 (Spring, 1973): 110-148.
Lefresne, Brian. “Applications of Chaos Theory and Fractal Geometry in the Music of
György Ligeti.” M.A. thesis, University of Ottawa, 2005.
247
Lendvai, Ernő. “Einführung in die Formen- und Harmonienwelt Bartóks (1953).” In Weg
und Werk, Schriften und Briefe, edited by Bence Szabolcsi, 91-137. Budapest:
Corvina, 1957.
Levy, Benjamin. “The Electronic Works of György Ligeti and Their Influence on His
Later Style.” Ph.D. diss., University of Maryland, 2006.
Ligeti, György. “A Memorial from Anne LeBaron.” In “American Composers Remember

György Ligeti (1923-2006).” Posted by NewMusicBox Staff, New Music Box,
July 21, 2006. http://www.newmusicbox.org/articles/American-Composers-
Remember-Gyorgy-Ligeti-19232006/.
———. Études pour piano, premier livre (1985). New York: Schott Musik
International, 1986.
———. Études pour piano, deuxième livre (1988-94). New York: Schott Musik
———. “György Ligeti.” In Composers on Music: Eight Centuries of Writings,

2nd ed., edited by Josiah Fisk and Jeff Nichols, 406-408. Boston: Northeastern
———. Interview by Bálint András Varga. “György Ligeti.” In From Boulanger

to Stockhausen: Interviews and a Memoir, 26-57. New York: University of
Rochester Press, 2013.
———. Interview by Dorle J. Soria. “György Ligeti: Distinguished and

Unpredictable.” Musical America 107, No. 4, September 1987. Posted by Josh
Ronsen, February 2003. http://ronsen.org/monkminkpinkpunk/9/gl5.html.
———. Interview by John Rockwell. “Laurels at an Auspicious Time for György

Ligeti.” New York Times, November 11, 1986.
http://www.nytimes.com/1986/11/11/arts/laurels-at-an-auspicious-time-for-
gyorgy-ligeti.html.
———. Interview by Monika Lichtenfeld. Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 142 (1981):
471-3.
———. Interview by Tünde Szitha. “A Conversation with György Ligeti.”

Hungarian Music Quarterly 3/1 (1992): 13-17.
———. Konzert für Klavier und Orchester (1985-88). New York: Schott Musik
248
———. Ligeti in Conversation with Peter Vernai, Josef Häusler, Claude
Samuel, and Himself, translated by Gabor J. Schabert, Sarah E. Soulsby, Terence
Kilmartin, and Geoffrey Skelton. London: Eulenberg Books, 1983.
———. “On my Etudes for Piano.” Translated by Sid McLachlan. Sonus 9/1
(1988): 3-7.
———. “On my Piano Concerto.” Translated by Robert Cogan. Sonus 9/1 (1988):
8-13.
———. Piano Concerto and Piano Etude sketches. Paul Sacher Foundation. Basel.
———. “States, Events, Transformations.” Translated by Jonathan Bernard.

Perspectives of New Music, Vol. 31, No. 1 (Winter, 1993): 164-171.
———. Trio for Violin, Horn, and Piano (1982). New York: Schott Musik
International,1984.
Lobanova, Maria. György Ligeti: Style, Ideas, Poetics. Berlin: Ernst Kuhn Verlag, 2002.
Lorenz, Edward. “Predictability: Does the Flap of a Butterfly’s Wings in Brazil Set Off a
Tornado in Texas?” Presented at the 139th meeting of the American Association
for the Advancement of Science. Washington, D.C., 1972.
Mandelbrot, Benoît. “Fractals I.” Edited by Samuel Kotz and Norman Lloyd Johnson.
Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences (New York: 1982): 185-186.
———. “How Long is the Coast of Britain? Statistical Self-Similarity and

Fractional Dimension.” Science (1967): 636-638.
———. The Fractal Geometry of Nature. New York: W. H. Freeman and

Company, 1982.
Mandelbrot, Benoît, Arthur Clarke, Nigel Lesmoir-Gordon, and Ian Stewart. The Colours
of Infinity: The Beauty and Power of Fractals. New York: Springer-Verlag
London Limited, 2010.
Mandelbrot, Benoît and Richard L. Hudson. The (Mis)Behaviour of Markets: A Fractal

View of Financial Turbulence. New York: Basic Books, 2004.
Google Groups. Mikulska, Margaret. Comment on György Ligeti’s visit to Yale

University. Posted October 10, 1993. https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/
rec.music.compose/s26Hqe5JHD0.
249
Pareyon, Gabriel. “On Musical Self-Similarity: Intersemiosis as Synecdoche and
Analogy.” PhD diss., University of Helsinki, 2011.
Peitgen, Heinz-Otto. “Continuum, Chaos, and Metronomes – A Fractal Friendship.” In

György Ligeti: Of Foreign Lands and Strange Sounds, edited by Louise
Duchesneau and Wolfgang Marx, 87-106. Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer, 2011.
———. In The Journal no. 3 (Schott, May/June1998): 1-2.

http://www.schott- music.com/cms/resources/_smi/9e873372599.pdf.
Peitgen, Heinz-Otto, Harmut Jürgens, and Dietmar Saupe. Chaos and Fractals: New
Frontiers of Science. 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag, Inc., 2004.
Peitgen, Heinz-Otto and Peter Richter. The Beauty of Fractals: Images of Complex
Dynamical Systems. New York: Springer-Verlag, Inc., 1986.
Roig-Francoli, Miguel. “Harmonic and Formal Processes in Ligeti’s Net-Structure

Compositions.” Music Theory Spectrum. Vol. 17, No. 2 (Autumn 1995): 242-
267.
Scrivener, Julie. “Representations of Time and Space in the Player Piano Studies of
Conlon Nancarrow.” PhD diss., Michigan State University, 2002.
Stahnke, Manfred. “The Hamburg Composition Class.” In György Ligeti: Of Foreign

Lands and Strange Sounds, edited by Louise Duchesneau and Wolfgang Marx,
223-244. Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer, 2011.
Searby, Michael. Ligeti’s Stylistic Crisis: Transformation in His Musical Style, 1974-
1985. Lanham: The Scarecrow Press, 2010.
———. “Ligeti's ‘Third Way’: ‘Non-Atonal’ Elements in the Horn Trio.”

Tempo, New Series, No. 216 (April 2001): 17-22.
Spindler, Jeremy. “Ligeti's Wedge: Expansion, Contraction, Transformation.” Ph.D. diss.,

Brandeis University, 2011.
Steinberg, Michael. The Concerto: A Listener’s Guide. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1998.
Steinitz, Richard. “À qui un hommage? Genesis of the Piano Concerto and the Horn
Trio.” In György Ligeti: Of Foreign Lands and Strange Sounds, edited by Louise
Duchesneau and Wolfgang Marx, 169-214. Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer,
2011.
———. “The Dynamics of Disorder.” The Musical Times Vol. 137, No. 1839
(May 1996): 7-14.
250
———. György Ligeti: Music of the Imagination. Boston: Northeastern
———. “Music, Maths, & Chaos.” The Musical Times Vol. 137, No. 1837
(March 1996): 14-20.
———. “Weeping and Wailing.” The Musical Times Vol. 137, No. 1842
(August 1996): 17-22.
Ian Stewart. Nature’s Numbers: Discovering Order and Pattern in the Universe. London:
Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1995.
Strogatz, Stephen. “Chaos.” The Great Courses lecture series. Ithaca: Cornell University,
The Teaching Company, 2008.
Straus, Joseph N. Introduction to Post-Tonal Music. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice-Hall, 2005.
Toop, Richard. György Ligeti. London: Phaidon Press Limited, 1999.
Wallin, Rolf. “Fractal Music - Red Herring or Promised Land? or ‘Just Another of Those
Boring Papers on Chaos.’ ” Lecture presented at the Nordic Symposium for
Computer Assisted Composition. Stockholm, 1989. Accessed 13 Dec. 2009.
http://www.rolfwallin.org/Fractalarticle.html.
Willmann, Roland. “Gebannte Zeit. Studien zum Klavierkonzert György Ligetis.” Studia
Musicologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, T. 42, Fasc. 3/4 (2001): 391-
472.
251

The Fourth Movement of György Ligetis Piano Concerto - Investigat PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Fourth Movement of György Ligetis Piano Concerto - Investigat PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

City University of New York (CUNY)

CUNY Academic Works

The Fourth Movement of György Ligeti's Piano Concerto:

How does access to this work benefit you? Let us know!

THE FOURTH MOVEMENT OF

GYÖRGY LIGETI’S PIANO CONCERTO:

INVESTIGATING THE MUSICAL-MATHEMATICAL CONNECTION

CYNTHIA LEE WONG

A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Music in partial fulfillment of the

The City University of New York

GYÖRGY LIGETI’S PIANO CONCERTO:

INVESTIGATING THE MUSICAL-MATHEMATICAL CONNECTION

CYNTHIA LEE WONG

8/18/16 Jeff Nichols

Date Chair of the Examining Committee

8/18/16 Norman Carey

Date Executive Officer

David Olan (Advisor)

Joseph N. Straus (First Reader)

The Fourth Movement of György Ligeti’s Piano Concerto:

Investigating the Musical-Mathematical Connection

Cynthia Lee Wong

Advisor: Professor David Olan

This interdisciplinary study explores musical-mathematical analogies in the fourth

movement, labeled according to my analysis.

Andrew Tomasello, and Christina Lee Wong.

List of Figures xiii

Part I: Mathematical and Musical Context 1

Chapter 1: Ligeti and Fractals 2

Ligeti’s Approach to Composition 12

1.3 Ligeti’s Late Style 12

Ligeti’s Relation to Mathematics

1.14 The Creation of the Piano Concerto 46

Chapter 2: Explanation of Mathematical Concepts 52

2.1 Mathematical inspiration for the fourth movement: ‘the Maelstrom’ 52

Julia and Mandelbrot Sets 54

2.2 The ‘Ligeti fractal’ as a Julia Set 54

2.3 A Brief Introduction to Julia and Mandelbrot Sets 55

2.4 Correlations between Julia and Mandelbrot Sets 56

Constructing Julia and Mandelbrot Sets 60

2.5 Iterating Mandelbrot Sets 60

2.6 Iterating Julia Sets 65

2.7 Graphing on the Complex Plane 66

2.8 Connected and Disconnected Julia Sets 68

A Deeper Study of Chaotic Systems 70

2.9 The Logistic Map: Periodic, Chaotic, and Intermittent Behavior 70

2.10 The U-Sequence 72

2.11 Self-Similarity in the Logistic Map 73

2.12 A Closer Look at the Butterfly Effect 74

2.13 The Lorenz Attractor 76

Ideas from Douglas Hofstadter 78

2.14 Broader Connections with Gödel’s Theorem of Inconsistency 78

Chapter 3: Rhythm / Form 81

3.1 Overview of Chapters 3-5 81

3.2 Summary of Mathematical Concepts Aspects 82

3.3 An Underlying Rhythmic Pattern 83

The Rhythm as “Fractal” and “Chaotic” 87

3.4 Fractal Aspect I –An “Irregular and Very Fragmented” Rhythmic

3.5 Fractal Aspect 2 – Self-Similarity at Multiple Scales 92

3.6 Fractal Aspect 2 – the Fourth Movement Form as An Extension of

3.7 Fractal Aspect 3 – Simplicity à Complexity and Space-Filling

3.8 Fractal Aspect 4 - Iteration 103

3.9 Fractal Aspect 5 – “Focusing on smaller and smaller details” 103