Studying Luigi Nono's A Pierre. Dell'azzurro Silenzio, Inquietum (1985) As A Performance Event

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/254221338
Studying Luigi Nono's A Pierre. Dell'azzurro silenzio, inquietum (1985) as a

Performance Event
Article in Contemporary Music Review · October 2011

DOI: 10.1080/07494467.2011.665579
CITATIONS READS
3 1,330
3 authors, including:
Laura Zattra Jan Burle

Institut de Recherche et Coordination Acoustique/Musique 12 PUBLICATIONS 29 CITATIONS
55 PUBLICATIONS 80 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Collaboration in Electrocoustic Music / Musical Assistants View project
Analysis of Sound Design Practice View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Laura Zattra on 11 March 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [LAURA ZATTRA]
On: 26 April 2012, At: 02:26
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Contemporary Music Review

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gcmr20
Studying Luigi Nono's A Pierre.

Dell'azzurro silenzio, inquietum (1985)
as a Performance Event
Laura Zattra, Ian Burleigh & Friedemann Sallis
Available online: 20 Apr 2012
To cite this article: Laura Zattra, Ian Burleigh & Friedemann Sallis (2011): Studying Luigi Nono's A
Pierre. Dell'azzurro silenzio, inquietum (1985) as a Performance Event, Contemporary Music Review,
30:5, 411-439
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07494467.2011.665579
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-

conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation
that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any
instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary
sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Vol. 30, No. 5, October 2011, pp. 411–439
Studying Luigi Nono’s A Pierre.

Dell’azzurro silenzio, inquietum (1985)
as a Performance Event
Laura Zattra, Ian Burleigh and Friedemann Sallis
Downloaded by [LAURA ZATTRA] at 02:26 26 April 2012
Introduction
During his last decade (1980–90), Luigi Nono invested considerable time and effort
exploring and studying sound produced by acoustic instruments and modified using
‘live electronic’ techniques. To do this, he relied on the help of a close-knit,
heterogeneous circle of collaborators devoted to his work. The group evolved over
time and consisted of numerous musicians (Roberto Fabbriciani, flute; Ciro
Scarponi, clarinet; Giancarlo Schiaffini, tuba; Susanne Otto, contralto; among
others), sound engineers (Hans Peter Haller, Alvise Vidolin, Rudolf Strauss) and
technicians (Bernd Noll, Andreas Breitscheid). Certain key collaborators, such as
André Richard, were so embedded in numerous aspects of the compositional projects
as to defy easy classification. Together they explored the real-time, microtonal
manipulation of sound, the dissemination of these sounds in space and the role of the
performer. This research took place in long sessions (sometimes lasting several days)
at the Experimental Studio of the Heinrich-Strobel-Stiftung (hereafter the Strobel
Foundation) of the Südwestrundfunk (SWR) at Freiburg im Breisgau, and would
often continue as a work-in-progress process, well beyond the first performance of
the work.1
Nono began working at the Strobel Foundation in December 1980 (Haller, 1995, 2:
116). Fabbriciani reports that he convinced Nono to go to the Strobel Foundation
and took him there for the first time in his car.2 During the period known as ‘Verso
Prometeo’ (the years leading up to the first performance of Prometeo. Tragedia
dell’ascolto in 1984), Nono began using computer technology combined with
analogue equipment to filter, prolong, delay, distribute and analyse sounds produced
in real time by singers and instrumentalists.3 In some cases, he profited from the
availability of new devices, such as the Halaphone, that had been developed at the
Strobel Foundation.4 At the same time, a dedicated group of musicians (notably
Fabbriciani, Scarponi and Schiaffini) worked with the composer to develop adequate
ISSN 0749-4467 (print)/ISSN 1477-2256 (online) ª 2011 Taylor & Francis

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07494467.2011.665579
412 L. Zattra et al.
performance practices for these new ideas. Veniero Rizzardi (1999, pp. 49–52) has
shown that this collaborative approach to creative work had been part of Nono’s
working methods for a long time. As early as 1965, Nono employed the studio
technologies of electroacoustic music to experiment with new types of performance
practice and to develop new forms of notation to accommodate this practice. The
result was A floresta é jovem e cheja de vida for three voices, clarinet, five copper plates
and tape (1966), the composer’s first work involving a form of live electronics, which
entailed a flexible, improvisational relationship between the composer on the one
hand and the singers, instrumentalists and technicians on the other. A Pierre.
Dell’azzurro silenzio, inquietum for contrabass flute in G, contrabass clarinet in B flat
and live electronics (1985) presents an excellent example of this collaborative
approach in the composer’s late work. The composition was written in honour of
Pierre Boulez’s 60th birthday; the published score bears the dedication ‘A Pierre
Boulez per il 26-3-1985’. The work was first performed on 31 March 1985 in Baden-
Baden. The score of A Pierre was published by Ricordi in two versions: the first in
1995 and the second, definitive version, in 1996, both edited by André Richard and
Marco Mazzolini.5 Both of these editions present the music for the contrabass flute
and contrabass clarinet on separate staves, beneath which are a series of lines
indicating the dynamic levels (f/ff, mf, p, silence) that the sound director must adhere
to in controlling the two pairs of speakers in front and in back of the performance
space (Figure 1). Both editions of A Pierre also present a facsimile of Nono’s
autograph, at the end of which he wrote: ‘20-2-1985 Venezia’. According to
Mazzolini, the editions are based on the study of six sources:
(1) Nono’s autograph manuscript;

(2) a manuscript of the score prepared by Roland Breitenfeld, who worked with
Nono at the Strobel Foundation;
(3) data pertaining to the live electronics then owned by the Experimental Studio
in Freiburg;
(4) reports by Nono’s collaborators;
(5) Nono’s autograph parts for contrabass flute and contrabass clarinet with
annotations by Fabbriciani (Figure 2) and Scarponi;
(6) recordings of the work.6
Neither published score is considered a critical edition, but the second, ‘definitive’
edition is published under the authority of the Editorial Committee for the Works of
Luigi Nono.
The published score presents the musicians with clear performance instructions
based on a reliable understanding of the composer’s intentions. The score sets out the
time frame of the work: 60 bars (presumably one for every year of Boulez’s life in
1985) in common time and in a strict tempo (crotchet¼30 MM). Under these
circumstances, a performance should last approximately eight minutes.7 The basic
pitch material to be used by the flutist and clarinettist is also clearly indicated. As a
Contemporary Music Review 413
Figure 1 Luigi Nono, A Pierre, published score, 1996 version, bars 42–51. Reprinted with
kind permission of BMG Ricordi Music Publishing S.p.A.
Figure 2 Luigi Nono, A Pierre, autograph manuscript with annotations by Roberto

Fabbriciani, bars 44–51. NB: the autograph is part of Fabbriciani’s personal collection; a
copy is conserved at the Archivio Luigi Nono, ALN 53.10/01-06, Luigi Nono Archive,
Venice. ª Luigi Nono Heirs and reprinted with kind permission from Roberto
Fabbriciani.
prescriptive document for performance, the published score is entirely adequate and
has been the basis of numerous successful concerts. However, as a source of
information for the analyst or the musicologist interested in studying the work, the
published score is insufficient for a number of reasons. First, the two instrumental
parts are written for transposing instruments. The contrabass flute in G is written an
octave and a perfect fourth above sounding pitch (Figure 3), and the contrabass
clarinet in B flat is written two octaves and a major second above sounding pitch.
Each part needs to be transposed in order to see the true harmonic content of the
instrumental duo. Second, almost none of the sounds emitted by the two instruments
are ‘ordinary’ pitches. Most require some form of extended instrumental technique:
mixtures of breath and sound, suoni ombra (shadow or ghost sounds), whistle tones
and multiphonics. The notation tells the performers what to do and when, but it does
not show the musical outcomes of these actions in any detail.
Finally, the information required for setting up and managing the live electronic
aspects of the work is clearly presented in the published ‘Notes’ preceding the score.
These pages contain instructions to the two instrumentalists and the sound direction,
as well as a diagram of the patch for the live electronics. With regard to the live
electronic part, they prescribe the presets of the potentiometers, an outline of the
overall dynamics for the entire work, cut-off frequencies of the bandpass filters,
intervals by which the harmonizers alter the pitch, and delay and reverberation times
(Richard and Mazzolini, 1996, pp. xi–xvi). However, these aspects of the work are
completely absent from the published score. Indeed, simply trying to follow a correct
performance in the score is extremely challenging because so much of the work is not
notated, notably the microtonal manipulation and the spatial presentation of sound.
How are we to study and analyse such a work?
In the following essay, we will examine aspects of the creative process that resulted
in the composition of A Pierre, and data recorded during rehearsals and a concert of
the work that took place at the Banff Centre (Canada) during the week of 23–28
February 2009. In other words, borrowing Jean-Jacques Nattiez’s concepts of the
poietic and aesthesic sides of the work, we will study both Nono’s working
documents and recorded data of a recent concert performance precisely because his
so-called neutral level remains out of our grasp. Nattiez’s proposal for a semiology of
music is a child of the positivistic time. Borrowing from linguistics and the work of
Jean Molino, Nattiez established tri-partite theoretical framework (poietic–neutral–
aesthesic) for the study of music. Whereas the poietic and aesthesic poles represent
the creative process and the reception of the finished work respectively, the so-called
neutral level (niveau neutre) is the work per se, presumably as the composer ideally
conceived/imagined it.8 Like most other analytical and theoretical models developed
during the second half of the 20th century, Nattiez is beholden to the principles of the
‘strong work concept’. This concept arose in the early 19th century and became a
dominating norm, particularly in schools and universities devoted to the study of art
music during the 20th century. Its emergence brought about numerous changes with
one common aim.
Figure 3 Roberto Fabbriciani, handwritten performance instructions for the flute part
of A Pierre. NB the autograph is part of Fabbriciani’s personal collection; a copy is
conserved at the Archivio Luigi Nono, ALN 53.10/01-06, Luigi Nono Archive, Venice.
ª Luigi Nono Heirs and reprinted with kind permission from Roberto Fabbriciani.
[These changes] marked a transition in practice, away from seeing music as a
means to seeing it as an end. More specifically, they marked a move away from
thinking about musical production as comparable to the extra-musical use of a
general language that does not presuppose self-sufficiency, uniqueness, or
ownership of any given expression. In place of that, musical production was now
seen as the use of musical material resulting in complete and discrete, original and
fixed, personally owned units. (Goehr, 2002, p. 206)
Ludwig van Beethoven’s achievement lies at the heart of this change. The insight that
he thrust upon the aesthetic consciousness of the early 19th century was that a musical
text, like a literary text or philosophical text, can harbour meaning, which is made
manifest, but not entirely subsumed in its acoustic presentation, and that a musical
creation can exist as an ‘art work of ideas’ transcending its various interpretations.
Thus, the score of a Beethoven symphony ceased to be a mere recipe for performance;
it quickly came to be seen as an inviolable musical text, whose meaning was to be

deciphered with ‘exegetical’ interpretations (Dahlhaus, 1989, pp. 9–10). Now, if
Beethoven did claim the strong work concept for music, this new idea did not become
dominant or normative overnight. On the contrary, the more traditional view of
music as a performance event remained well-entrenched, especially outside of
German-speaking lands, and was never entirely eliminated, even in the 20th century.
The compositions of Gioacchino Rossini, Niccolò Paganini and the young Franz Liszt
are examples of music for which the score constituted the point of departure for a
performance event that remained the crucial aesthetic arbiter for the value of the work.
Rossini’s musical thought hinged on the performance as an event, not on the work as a
text passed down and from time to time given acoustical ‘explications’. As such, a
Rossini score could be adapted to the changing conditions of various theatres without
violating either the meaning or the identity of the work. Thus, the idea of an
‘authentic’ or ‘final’ version of a Rossini opera is a chimera. Instead, we have a series of
instantiations standing side by side as equivalent realisations of a mutable concept. For
Dahlhaus, the difference between Beethoven’s strong work concept and Rossini’s
mutable, performance-based concept ‘points to nothing less than a far-reaching rift . . .
that constitutes one of the fundamental musical facts of the nineteenth century’
(Dahlhaus, 1989, pp. 8–10; see also Dahlhaus, 1988, 41–46).
Of course, mentioning Rossini and Nono together in same sentence seems
counter-intuitive, if not downright wrong-headed. And yet, Nono’s late work does
constitute an implicit critique of the strong work concept inherited from the 19th
century. Furthermore, parallels can be drawn between A Pierre and the older
performance-based work concept. As noted above, the score of A Pierre is not a text
that allows one to study the work. It is rather a point of departure for a performance,
and as such is conceived to provide latitude to performers with regard to extended
techniques (shadow tones, whistle tones, multiphonics and the performers’ use of the
microphones). The choices the performers make will depend on their playing ability
and also, crucially, on the acoustic attributes of each performance space. As a result,
each performance will present a distinct version of the work. Of course, this is true of
all performances. The crucial difference between A Pierre and say a Beethoven string
quartet is that with the former, the score is a function of the concert, whereas with the
latter the concert is a function of the score. Having said that, the latitude afforded to
performers does not mean that the identity of A Pierre is at all problematic. The
score, which functions as a template for performance (a kind of 20th century
tablature) is sufficiently clear to be able to distinguish between legitimate
interpretations and those that move too far away from the composer’s intentions.9
Finally, towards the end of his life Nono seems to have distanced himself from the
strong work concept, at least with regard to the idea of a definitive text. In an
interview given in 1987 to Philippe Albèra, Nono insisted on the work-in-progress
approach that he had developed with his collaborators at the Strobel Foundation.
Albèra then asked about the transmission of his work after his death. Nono replied:
‘Other musicians will do other things! We try to fix our ideas graphically, but, as I
have said many times, I do not put much stake in the concept of writing [au concept
d’écriture]!’ Albèra then asked if the making, communicating and living the
experience of creation was more important than achieving a fixed outcome. Nono
replied: ‘Absolutely!’ (Albèra, 1987, p. 19). Nono was not attempting to move back to
some older form of art. On the contrary, during the last 10 years of his career, he
strove to overcome that rift that had opened up during the 19th century between
performance and composition. Consequently, any attempt to study A Pierre as
though an ideal version (niveau neutre) exists, hovering, as it were, over the concert
performances of the work, would be a mistake. The only access we have to this
remarkably successful piece of music is through a genetic study of the composer’s
surviving working documents and examination of the objective data collected from
recordings of the work as a performed event. In the following text, information from
these two perspectives will be presented so as to better understand what Marinella
Ramazzotti (2007, pp. 200–216) recently described as ‘la poetica dello spazio’ [the
poetics of space] in Nono’s late work.
Experimenting with Sound and the Creation of a New Performance Tradition

In a recent interview, Roberto Fabbriciani noted that Nono’s late work is very
difficult to notate, because fixing it too precisely on paper constitutes a kind of
impoverishment. The music should stimulate the inquisitive musician to explore the
acoustic properties of the performance space, rather than merely try to reproduce
what can be read on paper.
Many performers think, incorrectly, that the score [of A Pierre] is very easy: the
score is in 4/4 and the durations are written in semibreves, crotchets and minims.
Where is the difficulty? But the virtuosity of Nono’s music resides in the sound
production of each note, in the requirements of producing a sound ppppp. If one
does not know how Nono’s music should sound, then it is very difficult to interpret
the piece, because the score of A Pierre contains so little practical information for
sound production.10
For example, in his autograph, Nono calls for an array of extended instrumental
techniques but he does not provide fingerings or information about how these
sounds should be produced. Nono’s autograph copies of the instrumental parts
are very instructive in this regard. Figure 2 shows the solutions chosen by
Fabbriciani, who worked with the composer in developing these techniques.
Fabbriciani also provided three pages of handwritten instruction on emission
techniques that were included in the ‘Notes’ to the published score. Perhaps the
editors of the score decided to include Fabbriciani’s instructions in the ‘Notes’
published as preface to the score, but not his fingerings, because they felt that the
performer be required to find the fingerings and emission methods that work best for
a specific performance venue?
Fabbriciani recalls that he and Nono had been looking for new and
unconventional sounds for many years prior to the composition of A Pierre. This
sound production was based on innovative performance techniques, which the

composer described as ‘anti-academic’. Nono first discussed this with Fabbriciani in
Milan in 1978 following a presentation of Camillo Togni’s Blaubart at La Scala.
Further discussions then took place at Fabbriciani’s home in Florence and in
Venice during the following year. During these meetings, Fabbriciani presented
various techniques many of which he had used in the performance of All’aure in
una lontananza (1977) by Salvatore Sciarrino. Nono and Fabbriciani agreed that the
athletic style of instrumental music, an approach often associated with avant-garde,
should be abandoned. In its place, Nono’s new virtuosity would focus on the
control of irregularities that arise when trying to produce a sound at the limits of
audibility (ppppp), or the harmonic partials of a given fundamental pitch (suoni
ombra). This research continued at the Strobel Foundation during the 1980s and
corresponded with similar work undertaken with other instrumentalists. Fabbriciani
and Nono would stay for many days, sometimes longer than a week, during which
time they explored and recorded sounds produced acoustically and modified
electronically. Fabbriciani would improvise a sound or an emission technique and
Nono would decide whether this or that result was worth repeating or saving.
Armed with coloured pencils and large sheets of paper, he remained seated with his
eyes closed. Then he wrote out sketches. Every sound (also those used in A Pierre)
was studied in this way for months, even years. In the end, they established their
own ‘performance tradition’. ‘Together we recorded enough material not just for
one Prometeo, but for ten! This enormous amount of material was recorded
primarily by Scarponi, Schiaffini, Otto and me.’11
Tracing the Genesis of A Pierre

The status of the score in Nono’s late work is somewhat ambiguous. For some, it is
the crucially important source for the transmission of the work. For example, Jürg
Stenzl and Hans Peter Haller adopted this idea of the relationship between work and
score to justify the decision taken by Ricordi and the Editorial Committee for the
Works of Luigi Nono not to permit future performances of Découvrir la subversion:
hommage à Edmond Jabès for contralto, bass, bass tuba, horn, flute, speaking voice
and live electronics (1987) and Post-Prae-Ludium n. 3 ‘BAAB-ARR’ for piccolo solo
(1988).12 In explaining the Committee’s decision, Stenzl noted that both works fall
short of what he calls the ‘opus perfectum et finitum’ because the final versions were
never ‘set down in writing’ (Stenzl, 1993, p. 15). In making this determination, Stenzl
appears to agree with Georg Feder who famously stated that musical compositions
only become works once they are written down; failing that condition, an unwritten
or partially notated performance cannot be considered a musical work, at least not in
the philological sense (Feder, 1987, p. 13). However, this rather traditional idea of the
relationship between work and score is at odds with Nono’s own statements made
during the last 10 years of his career. As noted above, when working with performers
he knew and trusted, he was willing to allow them freedom, to ‘participate more
directly and personally in the musical creation’ (Haller, 1993, pp. 18–19).
Furthermore, in a programme note written for the first performance of Post-Prae-
Ludium per Donau (1987), Nono wrote that whereas the concept of the work is fixed
right down to the smallest details, the score remains a guide or trace (traccia) for the
performer.13 And this is indeed the role the score plays in Post-Prae-Ludium per
Donau. It is a carefully planned script that presents the performer with possibilities
rather than with a rigid prescription.14 This concept of the score is clearly at odds
with Stenzl’s rather traditional idea of the score as repository of the definitive work.
According to Haller, the basic concept of a given work would be well established in
the composer’s mind before he began working at Experimental Studio. On arrival,
Nono would endeavour to present this concept in the form of diagrams that he
would draw by hand on a large blackboard.15 Out of these basic ideas, the specific
technical configurations and performance techniques would be elaborated through
discussion and practical experiments with musicians, audio engineers and
technicians.16 In this process, intensive listening and writing were centrally important
activities. ‘Every new sound was not only carefully examined through listening (er–
hören), but it was also simultaneously written down so that it could be exactly
reproduced’ (Haller, 1995, 2: 118–120). The writing down in conventional notation
using traditional musical symbols was a crucially important part of Nono’s creative
process. However, the purpose of this writing was not to fix an ‘opus perfectum et
finitum’ (to borrow Stenzl’s term) on paper, but rather to capture, as objectively as
possible, the parameters and scope of an experimental/rehearsal event so that it could
be optimally reproduced in the context of a performance. In his late work, Nono was
moving away from that ‘idealized notion of what a musical work is: something wholly
realized by its creator, fixed in writing and thus capable of being preserved’
(Taruskin, 1995, p. 227). This does not mean that he was intent on undercutting the
concept of the work or abdicating his responsibility for it. To come back to
Dahlhaus’s distinction between Beethoven’s strong work concept and Rossini’s
mutable, performance-based concept (see above), Nono was certainly not attempting
to replace one concept with the other. Rather, he appears to have been trying to
overcome the rift that opened up in the 19th century. On the one hand, he retained
his authority over the work. There is no evidence whatsoever that he even considered
turning aesthetic responsibility for his music over to performers. On the other hand,
his aversion to fixing his work in definitive form (either a published score or a
recording) also signals a strong interest in music as a performance event that appears
to be one of the leading characteristics of his late work.
Composers’ sketches never present a complete record of the creative process.
Nevertheless, the surviving sketches and drafts pertaining A Pierre are fairly
comprehensive and appear to be representative of how Nono composed during
the last years of his career. The Archivio Luigi Nono contains a substantial
collection of material pertaining to the composition: 104 folios of manuscript
material directly related to the compositional process: see the table in the
Appendix for a complete list of these sources.17 The material shown in this table
is organised in a presumed chronological order because many of the sources are

not dated. The creative process resulting in A Pierre took place between
September 1984 and February 1985 (see source 1 of the table in the Appendix),
and began during rehearsals for the first performance of Prometeo. Tragedia
dell’ascolto (Venice, 25, 26, 28, 29 September 1984). Fabbriciani recalls suggesting
to Nono that he should write a work, based on section VIII of Io, frammento dal
Prometeo because he felt that the live electronic potential explored in that work
had not been completely exploited.18
The first sketch pertaining directly to the published score of A Pierre presents a
provisional pitch structure, written in a light blue ink for the contrabass clarinet
(Figure 4). The first six pitches of this sketch (upper left side of the bi-folio)
correspond with the bars 1–19 of the contrabass clarinet part of the published score.
Of interest is the fact that the sketch presents the melodic structures at sounding
pitch and not as they appear in the published score, where they are transposed for
contrabass clarinet in B flat. The Archivio contains a number of sketches, which
precede the writing of the sketch in Figure 4. Figure 5 shows a sketch on which Nono
copied the pitch content of the contrabass clarinet (top left of the bi-folio) and the
bass flute (top right of the bi-folio) of Section VIII of Io, frammento. The copied parts
are in black ink and cannot be directly linked to the pitch content of A Pierre.
However, on the lower half of the bi-folio Nono wrote out numerous annotations
and observations in a blue ink that do pertain to the latter work. Notice for example
the remark at the bottom middle of the bi-folio: ‘coralità a 2/due cori’, which appears
to refer to the subtitle of A Pierre, ‘a piu cori’. Notice also the low B flat (a major
second below C1 in Helmholtz notation) written in black ink at the centre of the bi-
folio. Though it is not used in the final score, this same pitch appears twice in the
sketch shown in Figure 4.
Once the pitch structure was written down, Nono added other parameters. Figure
6 presents a rejected sketch in which Nono wrote the duration structure of the
clarinet part. The sketch covers the 60 bars of the work and presents a duration
scheme that is very similar to the contrabass clarinet part in the published score.
Figure 4 Luigi Nono, A Pierre, early sketch of the contrabass clarinet melody, ALN
53.04.01/04sx-dx, Luigi Nono Archive, Venice. ª Luigi Nono Heirs.
The writing of the instrumental parts for A Pierre appears to have continued more
or less one parameter or aspect at a time, in a procedure that could be described as
layering. In Figure 7, we see the first draft of the duo. The clarinet part with its
duration structure is written in the same lighter blue ink that Nono used to write the
pitch structure in Figure 4. Beneath it, Nono added a part written for bass flute in C
in black ink (probably with a ballpoint pen). Note that the flute part includes
fingerings, which were supplied by Fabbriciani; clear evidence of the collaborative
approach that Nono used in the composition of this work.19 Figure 8 shows a second
draft of the duo. In this case, both the contrabass clarinet and the bass flute parts are
written in the same blue ink as the initial sketch (Figure 4). To this, Nono added
dynamic markings in red with corrections in light green ink and fermatas in dark blue
ink. Thus writing implements and ink colour are indicative of the compositional
stage of each sketch or draft: light blue ink seems to represent a stabilised level of the
work to which new parameters or aspects are added in different colours.
At this point, the instrumental duo was now clearly ‘in sight’. A third draft of the
duo, dated 20 February 1985, was completed with the clarinet part written out in its
definitive version. The flute part was still written for bass flute in C; however, by this
time Nono was clearly weighing the possibility of using the contrabass flute in G that
Fabbriciani had brought to the Experimental Studio at the beginning of February

423
Figure 5 Luigi Nono, A Pierre, sketch, ALN 53.03/01sx-dx, Luigi Nono Archive, Venice. ª Luigi Nono Heirs.
424
L. Zattra et al.
Figure 6 Luigi Nono, A Pierre, sketch, duration scheme for the contrabass clarinet part, number ALN 53.03/03Vsx-dx, Luigi Nono
Archive, Venice. ª Luigi Nono Heirs.

425
Figure 7 Luigi Nono, A Pierre, first draft of the instrumental duo, ALN 53.04.02/01sx-dx, Luigi Nono Archive, Venice. ª Luigi Nono
Heirs.
426
L. Zattra et al.
Figure 8 Luigi Nono, A Pierre, second draft of the instrumental duo, ALN 53.04.02/04sx-dx, Luigi Nono Archive, Venice. ª Luigi Nono
Heirs.
20
(Haller, 1999). The fair copy of the instrumental parts, written for contrabass flute
in G and contrabass clarinet in B flat would have had to have been completed
between the writing of the third draft (20 February) and the 26 February 1985, the
date of the first performance. The creative process continued as Nono wrote the fair
copy of the work and even after the first performance. For example, the two
loudspeakers placed behind the audience were added by Nono after the first
performance, with a note ‘ad libitum’ (Haller, 1999).
Unfortunately, the autographs do not contain much information about the ‘live
electronic’ aspects of the work. This is a disappointment because, as noted above, this
aspect of the work is of considerable importance. Indeed, one could say that the
instrumental duo constitutes a kind of raw, primarily homophonic, material that is
realised ‘polyphonically’ through real time, live electronic manipulation. But how was
Nono able to produce this aspect of the work ‘out of thin air’? The answer to this
question brings us back to the collaborative nature of this project. On the one hand,
Nono and his team had just completed the successful first performance of Prometeo.
Tragedia dell’ascolto five months earlier in Venice. Based on the experience gained,
they knew what kinds of effects they could expect from specific electronic
configurations without necessarily writing it all down. (Composers normally only
notate what they think they might forget in their sketch material.)21 On the other
hand, we also need to consider the serendipitous nature of this type of collaboration
that can lead to unexpected results. Haller reports that one morning Nono called
from the Halden-Hotel to say that he would arrive late for work that day. Both
Fabbriciani and Scarponi had already arrived and so Haller decided to undertake
some experiments with musical listening and short-term memory.
For a long time the question of [the] time limit of repetition had been on my mind,
of a canonical form, after which the original of the repeating audio signal is no
longer entirely present in one’s mind. That is, selective listening becomes less
discriminating. Of course, it was very important for this experiment, that there
should not be an acoustic silence between the original sequence of notes and its
repetition, but up to the moment of repetition a continued acoustic information
must been heard. The result of our experiment: With a delay of about 24 seconds
the previously quoted time limit was reached. The row of tones was identified only
partly, but more so than a newly played sound, in other words, no repetition of an
audio signal played 24 seconds previously. The result [sic] further experiments
showed that this psychological process of listening depends on the sound colour,
on rhythmical forms and the location of sound of the replay. So, I have changed the
repeated sequences of tones, selected the sound with band pass filters and mixed in
some reverberations. The result was stunning: The time limit could be shortened by
about half, about 12 seconds. I played in the electro acoustic signal to the original
by means of two loudspeakers. It was unavoidable to re-record small parts of this
signals [sic], so that there was a hardly audible Feedback, which again created a very
diffuse background sound. [. . .] While the two musicians and I carried out our
acoustic experiments, Luigi Nono must have opened the door of our studio and
listened to the experiments. Suddenly he entered unexpectedly, smiled and said: ‘I
did arrive after all’. (Haller, 1999)
As a result of these unplanned experiments and Nono’s unexpected early arrival at
the Experimental Studio that day, one of the most important structural features of A
Pierre is a three-voice canon based on the 12- and 24-second delay of the
instrumental duo.22 This aspect of the work is not notated in the score, it cannot be
reconstructed from the notes performance instructions that precede the score and
there is no trace of it in Nono’s surviving sketches and drafts.23 Consequently, in
order to study this and many other aspects of the ‘live electronic’ portion of the work,
we decided to examine data collected during rehearsals and a performance of the
work recorded at the Banff Centre (Alberta, Canada) in February 2009.
Recording Performances of A Pierre at the Banff Centre

Recordings do not fix or objectify the work in the same way that a score does, but
they can reliably reproduce musical performances. Two conditions must be met to
ensure that the reproduced phenomenon of a performance is valid and can be used
for a study: (1) the performance must be deemed a correct interpretation of the work,
and (2) the recording must capture the performance both as a whole in such a way
that the performance can be reliably reproduced (played back), and in sufficient
detail so that the constituent parts of the work can be studied. As part of a long-term
research project that focuses on the study of works that cannot be set down in
conventional notation, the authors of this essay undertook the recording of two late
works by Nono: A Pierre and Post-prae-ludium per Donau (1987) for tuba in F and
live electronics (Burleigh & Sallis, 2008). The recording sessions took place in the
Rolston Recital Hall of the Banff Centre, 23–28 February 2009. For A Pierre, the
musicians were: Marieke Franssen (contrabass flute), Carlos Noain Maura (contra-
bass clarinet), and Juan Parra Cancino (live electronics). The tuba part of Post-prae-
ludium per Donau was performed by Tjeerd Oostendorp. Rehearsals, the concert
performance (27 February), and a post-concert session (28 February) were recorded
by a team of Banff Centre recording engineers, under the direction of John D. S.
Adams.24 Through careful study, practice, and a week of rehearsals, the musicians
produced credible and indeed compelling interpretations of both works.25 A Pierre
was prepared using the 1996 Ricordi edition of the score. Performance instructions
provided in the score were followed to the letter (instrument and loudspeaker
positions, relative intensities, etc.) and the same setup was used for rehearsals, the
concert and the post-concert recording session. These optimal rehearsal and
performance conditions allowed the three musicians to better integrate the
performance space, and enabled them to achieve a balance between the sounds
produced directly and processed sounds of the live electronic component.
In undertaking this recording project, the purpose of which was to collect data for
a more detailed study of A Pierre, we sought to obtain the following results:
(1) reproduce a valid, representative performance of A Pierre, true to the work in

all possible aspects;
(2) make a representative high-quality recording that captures spectral aspects
(frequencies and intensities) as well as spatial aspects of sound, the complete
image as well as its parts;
(3) use the recording to produce accurate visual/symbolic images of the sound
material.
Twenty-nine tracks were recorded for each rehearsal/performance of A Pierre, with

the aim to collect data that will allow the study of the performance on several levels:
(1) Each instrument was recorded by two microphones. (The score prescribes the use of
two microphones for each instrument to accommodate their physical size.) The
signal was used in performance as input for the live electronic manipulation of
sound; in the analysis phase these tracks were used for both the transcription of the
instrument lines, and also for the reconstruction of the performance.

(2) The most cryptic component of A Pierre is the sound processed by electronics.
Signals at various points of the electronic chain were recorded onto eight
separate tracks, namely: the output of both harmonizers, the output of each
band-pass filter and of the complete band-pass filter bank, and the combined
processed sound both before and after the reverberation unit. This latter track
contains the only processed signal heard by the audience.
(3) The four loudspeakers are sound sources that together with the two
instruments create the sonic result of the performance. Their signal was
recorded as four line-level tracks, and by four microphones that recorded the
sound coloration of each loudspeaker.
(4) Finally, the room sound was recorded by a four-microphone square (two AB pairs),
and an ambisonic recording was made by a Soundfield MKV microphone (Figure 9).
The recorded data documents respectively:
(1) the original sources of sound;

(2) intermediate steps in sound manipulation;
(3) additional, derived sounds that are part of the performance;
(4) the composite sonic result that includes the contribution of the concert hall,
the way it was heard by the audience.
After careful examination of the recorded data, we chose one of the three post-
concert recordings as the primary object of study (musicians are often at their best
following a major concert).
Ambisonic Recording Technology and the Plotting of Sound Displacement

Ambisonics, a technique for recording and playback of periphonic (full sphere)
sound, was developed by Michael A. Gerzon and others in the 1970s.26 Despite its
Figure 9 Diagram of the recording setup in the Rolston Recital Hall of the Banff Centre.
long existence, the technology is generally considered marginal because the

microphone is relatively expensive and its commercial applications have remained
limited. The so-called first-order B-format ambisonic track (as recorded by
Soundfield MKV27) consists of four monophonic channels labelled W, X, Y and
Z. The channels, recorded by four co-incident microphone capsules, store omni-
directional sound pressure signals, and three bi-directional pressure gradient
signals, respectively. The ambisonic recording thus captures the local sound field
corresponding to the spatial position of the microphone. Unlike the more common
surround-sound recording techniques, ambisonic recording does not take into
account (nor does it need to) the intended configuration of playback
loudspeakers.28 Instead, signals for a given loudspeaker configuration are obtained
through a process of ambisonic decoding (weighted mixing of the four channels).
The same ambisonic recording can be played back through different loudspeaker
configurations, and with sufficient number of loudspeakers the local sound field
can be restored in the ‘sweet spot’ position that corresponds to the position of the
microphone during recording.29
For our recording of A Pierre, the ambisonic microphone was placed near the
centre of the listening space, where a listener heard a balanced level of all six sound
sources—two instruments, four loudspeakers—and presumably had the best
experience of the performance. Objects of study (including musical performances)
must be reproducible if they are to be seriously examined. In the case of A Pierre,
the recording must reliably reconstruct not only sound frequency and intensity, but
also sound spatiality. The recorded data at the Banff Centre provided us three
options:
(1) the four recorded loudspeaker signals and the recordings made of the two
instruments; these signals were played back by six loudspeakers placed in
positions corresponding to the position of the sound sources in performance;
(2) the signal of the two AB pairs, played back by a rectangle of four loudspeakers;
(3) the ambisonic recording.
For our purposes, the ambisonic recording proved to be the best of the three. We
have since successfully used it to reconstruct the Banff performance of A Pierre in
various places, using a standard hexagon and octagon configurations of
loudspeakers, as well as in a dedicated periphonic listening space at Centre

for Computer Research in Music and Acoustics (CCRMA) at Stanford
University.30
The spatiality of sound (the positions, real or apparent of sound sources) is not
commonly thought of as part of the composer’s intended aesthetic object.31 However,
spatial distribution of sound (i.e. positions of real and virtual sound sources and their
mobility) are an integral part of A Pierre. Six sound sources (two instruments and
two pairs of speakers) surround the audience; their intensity is separately controlled,
as prescribed in the score. This control of sound intensity together with the canon
structures made up of immediately processed and delayed sounds create a complex
sonic texture of virtual sound sources that are mobile; that is to say, the direction of
their origin, as perceived by a listener, moves through space in time. This spatial
complexity of the sound texture is not constant: initially very sparse, it becomes more
complex around bar 12, and culminates around bar 38 with the maximum intensity
of ‘echoes of the past’ coming from both the front and back pairs of loudspeakers.
This aspect of the work is of course implicit in the score, but can only be
apprehended in performance.
As part of this on-going research project, we are developing an experimental
technique to map objectively (transcribe) the spatiality of sound from data provided
by the ambisonic recording. The channels of an ambisonic recording can be
combined (mixed) to create the signal of a ‘virtual’ monophonic microphone, i.e. a
signal that is identical to that which would be captured by a real microphone with a
given directional pattern pointed in an arbitrary direction. This is the feature of
ambisonic technology that makes it possible to objectively (albeit coarsely) analyse
the directional component of a local sound field.
Our experimental software tool functions as follows: a set of virtual microphones
with a cardioid directional pattern probe the surrounding computed space. The
sound of each source is detected at its highest intensity by the virtual microphone
that happens to be pointing in the direction of the source; and less by the rest of the
virtual microphones. Time is divided into frames (20 per second). The peak
intensities of sound in each time frame are stored as a matrix of numbers, associated
with azimuth and elevation of the respective virtual microphone. The azimuth and
elevation of the virtual microphone that detected the maximum intensity coincide
with the perceived spatial location of the (virtual) sound source. The series of
matrices of numbers are further numerically processed, in order to (1) smooth short-
time fluctuations of sound intensities, and (2) to add a sense of ‘inertia’ that reflects a
listener’s short-term sound memory. The smoothed values of spatial sound intensities
are then displayed using an intensity-to-colour scale, as an animated sound field map
that is synchronised to a (ideally ambisonic) sound playback.
The sound field map represents an imaginary spherical surface that surrounds the
listener. Ideally, it should be shown on a spherical screen, such as those found in
planetariums. For practical reasons, of course, the map has to be shown on the flat
surface of a computer screen. Our software offers a choice of either orthographic or a
simple cylindrical cartographic projection of the sphere. Figure 10 shows the

orthographic projection on the left and the cylindrical projection on the right, both
indicating a detected sound source. (The full dynamic potential of the map cannot be
reproduced as a static image in a printed publication.) Using an heuristic algorithm,
the software can also detect and display the trace of ‘spatial gestures’—detected time–
space trajectories in which the position of a detected virtual sound source follows a
smooth, continuous curve. Figure 10(a) shows a single peak in sound intensity, left-
back from the ambisonic microphone position. Figure 10(b) shows two such peaks: a
stronger one on the left and a weaker one in the front. The grey curve indicates the
spatial trajectory travelled by the weaker source.
Watching the computed, dynamic map while listening to the playback of the
ambisonic recording focuses attention on the three-dimensional nature of sound
events as they unfold in time and space, just as watching a spectrogram focuses
attention on frequency. At present, we are satisfied that the computed sound
trajectories do correlate with sound perception of the attentive listener.32
Figure 10 Orthographic (left, a) and cylindrical cartographic (right, b) projections of the

computed sound field map.
Conclusions
The notion of timbre fusion or a continuum of timbre is at the heart of this piece.33
One of the keys to the aesthetic concept of A Pierre is a short phrase, apparently
uttered by Nono just before the first performance: «non si deve capire niente» (‘one
must not understand anything’).34 In other words, once the live electronic
manipulation of sound moves above the threshold of silence (approximately bar
eight for the front speakers and bar 14 for the back speakers) the listener should no
longer be able to detect whether a given sound heard was produced by one of the two
performers or reproduced by electronic/digital equipment. This aspect of Nono’s
concept is clearly reflected in his instructions to the performers in which they are told
not to remove their mouthpieces from their lips, even during the longest rests and
pauses (Richard and Mazzolini, 1996, p. xvi). In other words, this visual aspect of
the performance should reinforce the auditory impression of a labyrinthine acoustic

environment in which the work seems to float on the threshold of sound and
silence. Neither the source of the sound nor the structure of the work should be
rendered obvious to the listeners.35 Nono often used the term suono mobile to
describe and define this aspect of his late work.36 The point is not to confound or
confuse the listener, but rather to stimulate active participation in apprehension of
the aesthetic object, i.e. the listener should be actively attempting to find his or her
way through the proposed labyrinth. In order to better understand this concept and
how Nono used it to create A Pierre, we have studied his working documents in
conjunction with data collected from a performance of the work. In so doing, we
have attempted to examine the formative processes of both the composer and the
performers that contributed to bringing the work into existence as an aesthetic
object in its own right and as a performance event. We have sought to retrace
Nono’s work in its ‘trials and interrogations of matter, in its response to and choice
of cues, in its intuition of what the inner coherence of the work wants to be’ (Eco,
1989, p. 163).
Notes
[1] An example of this process would be Omaggio a György Kurtág for contralto, flute, clarinet,
tuba and live electronics. The initial version of this work was performed on 10 June 1983
during Maggio Musicale Fiorentino held in Florence. The definitive version was first
performed on 6 June 1986 during the Giornata della nuova musica held in Turin.
[2] Telephone conversation between Fabbriciani and Laura Zattra, 7 June 2011.
[3] Haller recounts that digital technology was introduced to the Experimental Studio of the
Strobel Foundation during the 1980s for two reasons: to enlarge and refine control functions,
such as the sequencing of events (Haller, 1995, 2: 111), and to analyse acoustic data (Haller,
1995, 2: 141).
[4] In the 1970s, Peter Lawo and Hans Peter Haller developed an apparatus that enabled composers
to better control the movement of sound in space by combining four envelope oscillators
(Hüllkurvenoszillatoren) and four gates. Otto Tomek, then head of the SWF and President of the
Strobel Foundation, named the device the HAllerLAwoPHON (Haller, 1995, 1: 77).
[5] Publishing houses often produce and circulate preliminary scores that can be tested in
concert performances before a definitive version is published (Marco Mazzolini interviewed
by Zattra, 26 April 2011).
[6] Mazzolini interviewed by Zattra, 26 April 2011.
[7] The numerous fermatas in the score and the varying acoustic properties of the concert
space mean that length of each performance will differ somewhat, but not by more than
approximately 30 seconds. Telephone conversation between Fabbriciani and Zattra, 7 June
2011.
[8] For Molino the neutral level (also sometimes called the niveau matériel) represents the
message or content of a statement understood outside of the process that brought it into
existence, as well as outside of the various contexts within which it is received and
interpreted (Nattiez, 1975, pp. 50–55).
[9] An example of a problematic interpretation can be found on YouTube (http://youtu.be/
b3VTjtZdi4g). In this case, A Pierre was given a ‘network’ performance, with the three
performers located in Belfast, Hamburg and Graz. Given the very slow tempo and the
fact that interaction between the performers is part of the work, A Pierre is in fact an
excellent choice for this type of performance. Unfortunately, the performers chose to use
a bass flute instead of a contrabass flute, which automatically distorts the sounds that
Nono intended the flute to perform. Furthermore, they ignored Nono’s specific request
to maintain their mouth pieces in playing position even during long pauses. In a proper
interpretation, the live and processed sound sources should blend to create a kind of
labyrinthine effect that leaves the listener wondering just where the sounds are coming
from. In the YouTube concert, the performers should have been filmed at a distance and
should have maintained their mouthpieces in place for the duration of the concert.
[10] Fabbriciani interviewed by Zattra, 21 March 2011.
[11] Fabbriciani interviewed by Zattra, 21 March 2011. Tape recordings of this material are
conserved at the Archivio Luigi Nono.
[12] The statement was published in Italian, English and German together with explanatory texts
by Stenzl & Haller (1993).
[13] ‘Il decorso compositivo è fissato nei suoi dettagli, mentre la notazione è pensata come traccia
per l’esecutore.’ L. Nono (2001b).
[14] For a definition of the concept of ‘script’, see Cook (2003), pp. 206–207.
[15] In his book detailing work done at the Strobel Foundation, Haller presents a picture of just
such a diagram that Nono drew for Io, frammento dal Prometeo (Haller, 1995, 2: 119).
[16] In his German text, Haller described the elaboration and development of these ideas as the
growth of thread-like tentacles of a medusa: ‘wie die fadenartigen Fangarme einer Qualle’
(Haller, 1995, 2: 118).
[17] Scattered references to A Pierre can also be found in the sketches and drafts pertaining to the
first version of Risonanze erranti. Liederzyklus a Massimo Cacciari, composed in 1986
(however, this material has not been considered in this research).
[18] Fabbriciani interviewed by Zattra, 21 March 2011.
[19] Email from Fabbriciani to Zattra, 7 June 2011.
[20] Fabbriciani confirmed this in an interview and added that he purchased this new instrument,
which had recently been made in Munich. Email from Fabbriciani to Zattra, 3 May 2011.
[21] This explanation was confirmed by both Fabbriciani and Vidolin: Fabbriciani and Vidolin
interviewed by Zattra, 22 February and 21 March 2011, respectively.
[22] In a discussion with Friedemann Sallis in his home on 26 September 1998, Haller insisted
that though he collaborated intensely with Nono for many years, he was not and should not
be considered a co-author of the works. He understood his role as that of furnishing raw
material for a building project rather than as the creator of a work. In Haller’s opinion, Nono
was the true architect of the building (see also Haller, 1995, 2: 117).
[23] The canon cannot be precisely notated because the delayed ‘voices’ are modified micro-
tonally. Furthermore, the performers are explicitly instructed to react and adapt to the
acoustics of each performance venue. Consequently, though correct performances will
produce a work that is recognisable from one concert to another, the details of the musical
outcomes can vary significantly.
[24] The musicians were chosen by the Banff Centre because of their experience
with contemporary music (notably works involving live electronics) and their knowledge
of Nono’s work. We would like to thank the Department of Music of the Banff
Centre (especially the Head, Barry Shiffman, the Artistic Director, Henk Guittart and the
Head of the Audio Sector, Theresa Leonard) and the Faculty of Fine Arts (especially
Dean Ann Calvert) for their generous support and encouragement. We would also
like to take this opportunity to thank the Social Sciences and Humanities Research
Council of Canada (SSHRC) for supporting the current interpretative phase of this
research project.
[25] The protocol for recording the works was established in discussions between Friedemann
Sallis, Ian Burleigh and the administration of the Music Department of the Banff Centre
between August 2007 and January 2009. Sallis attended rehearsals, the concert and the post-
concert recording session. He took notes and interacted with the participants, but remained
a passive observer throughout the process.
[26] US Patents 3,997,725 (14 December 1976) and 4,042,779 (16 August 1977).
[27] The University of Calgary Theatre Services generously allowed us to borrow their Soundfield
MKV microphone for this research project.
[28] There is a fundamental difference between recording sound for sound production (consumer
edition) and for study. Surround sound techniques capture the ‘sense of space’, and
reproduce an illusion of that space, ambisonic technology provides a more reliable reading of
the space within which a musical event occurred.
[29] The minimum number of loudspeakers is four for horizontal sound, eight for a full
sphere; however, more loudspeakers (6 and 12, respectively) are required for a stable
sound image.
[30] Reconstruction of the concert performance of A Pierre using the ambisonic recording took
place at a colloquium at CCRMA, Stanford University (Burleigh & Sallis, 2010), at the
annual meeting of the Canadian University Music Society (Sallis, Burleigh & Rothery, 2010)
and at the annual meeting of the American Musicological Society (Sallis & Burleigh, 2010).
[31] The exceptions that prove the rule are of course the cori-spezzati works by Giovanni
Gabrieli.
[32] The spatial resolution of first-order ambisonics is limited by the slope of the virtual
microphones cardioid pattern and therefore is ‘myopic’ to a degree. Images obtained
from so-called higher-order (second or third) ambisonic signals provide much better
results that match, or even surpass directionality of human hearing; this process has been
successfully tested on synthesised higher-order ambisonic sound files. We are currently
investigating the feasibility of recording such signals using microphone arrays, in
particular, the Eigenmike1 microphone array developed by mh acoustics LLC (http://
www.mhacoustics.com/).
[33] Alastair Williams (among others) observes that as early as 1958 Boulez had hypothesised a
continuum de timbres between acoustic and electro-acoustic sound sources. His efforts were
thwarted because of the technical limits of the day (Williams, 2004, p. 512). In his discussion
of A Pierre, Haller (1999) speaks of ‘electronic sound extension’.
[34] Fabbriciani and Vidolin, interviewed by Zattra, 22 February and 21 March 2011 respectively.
[35] For example, the canon (based on the 12- and 24-second delay) that constitutes a structural
scaffolding for the entire work should remain almost imperceptible in a correct
interpretation of the work (Haller, 1991, pp. 48–49).
[36] The expression suono mobile orginates in the collaboration of the composer, the musicians
and the technicians at the Experimental Studio of the Strobel Foundation in Freiburg, and
derives specifically from the action of the live electronics on sound (Cecchinato, 1999, p. 135).
Presenting the piece Guai ai gelidi mostri (1983), Luigi Nono wrote: «suono mobile non
statico, per monolitismo delle formanti-microintervalli fino alla differenza di 1 Hz.—varie
trasposizioni dello spettro acustico non pi u unico—altre vibrazioni altri filtri per la
diffusione con l’uso compositivo dello spazio appositamente da studiare» (L. Nono, 2001a).
Milan: Ricordi; the complete text can be found here: http://www.luiginono.it/it/luigi-nono/
opere/guai-ai-gelidi-mostri).
[37] We have maintained the order and groupings of the items as they appear in the catalogue of
the Archivio. For an explanation of the organisational principles of this catalogue see, E.
Schaller (2004).
References
Albèra, P. (1987). Entretien avec Luigi Nono. Luigi Nono. Festival d’automne à Paris (pp. 13–22).
Paris: Contrechamps and L’Age de l’Homme.
Burleigh, I., & Sallis, F. (2008). Seizing the ephemeral: Recording Luigi Nono’s A Pierre Dell’azzurro
silenzio, inquietum, a pi u cori and Post-Prae-Ludium per Donau at the Banff Centre,
Proceedings of the Electroacoacoustic Music Studies Network International Conference
(EMS08), 3–7 June 2008, INA-GRM et Université Paris-Sorbonne (MINT-OMF), Paris.
http://www.ems-network.org/ems08/paper.html
Burleigh, I., & Sallis, F. (2010). ‘. . . come lo spazio compone il suono . . .’: Musical space in Luigi
Nono’s A Pierre. Dell’azzurro silenzio, inquietum for contrabass flute, contrabass clarinet and
live electronics (1985). Presented at the Center for Computer Research in Music and
Acoustics (CCRMA) of Stanford University on 17 May. https://ccrma.stanford.edu/events/
come-lo-spazio-compone-il-suono-musical-space-in-luigi-nono-s-pierre
Cecchinato, M. (1999). II suono mobile. La mobilità interna ed esterna dei suoni. In G. Borio, G.
Morelli & V. Rizzardi (Eds.), La nuova ricerca sull’opera di Luigi Nono. Archivio Luigi Nono
Studi I (pp. 135–153). Venice: Leo S. Olschki.
Cook, N. (2003). Music as performance. In M. Clayton, T. Herbert & R. Middleton (Eds.), The
cultural study of music: A critical introduction (pp. 204–214). New York: Routledge.
Dahlhaus, C. (1988). Drammaturgia dell’opera italiana. Trans. & Ed. L. Bianconi. Turin: EDT.
Dahlhaus, C. (1989). Nineteenth-century music. Trans. J. Bradford Robinson. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.
Eco, U. (1989). The open work. Trans. A. Cancogni. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Feder, G. (1987). Musikphilologie. Ein Einführung in die musikalische Textkritik, Hermeneutik und
Editionstechnik. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Goehr, L. (2002). The imaginary museum of musical works: An essay in the philosophy of music.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Haller, H.-P. (1991). Klang-und Zeitraum in der Musik Nonos. In O. Kolleritsch (Ed.), Die Musik
Luigi Nonos. Studien zur Wertungsforschung (Vol. 24, pp. 35–49). Vienna and Graz:
Universal Edition.
Haller, H.-P. (1993). Remarks on the possibility of performing anew Découvrir la subversion:
hommage à Edmond Jabès and Post-Praeludium n. 3 ‘Baab-arr’ by Luigi Nono. In Remarks on
Découvrir la subversion: hommage à Edmond Jabès and Post-Praeludium n. 3 ‘Baab-arr’ by
Luigi Nono, (pp. 6–10). Milan: Ricordi.
Haller, H.-P. (1995). Das Experimentalstudio der Heinrich-Strobel-Stiftung des Südwestfunks Freiburg
1971–1989. Die Erforschung der Elektronischen Klangumformung und ihre Geschichte, vol. 1/2.
Südwestfunk Scriftenreihe, Rundfunkgeschichte VI. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Haller, H.-P. (1999). A Pierre, Omaggio a György Kurtág. Presented at Incontro internazionale di
studi sulle nuove edizioni di Luigi Nono (André Richard, Marzo Mazzolini, Hans Peter
Haller). Venice: Fondazione Giorgio Cini, 10–11 December. http://www.hp-haller.homepage.
t-online.de/venice.html
Nattiez, J.-J. (1975). Fondements d’une sémiologie de la musique. Paris: Union Générale d’Édition.
Nono, L. (2001a). Guai ai gelidi mostri. In A. I. De Bendictis & V. Rizzardi (Eds.), Luigi Nono,
Scritti e colloqui (vol. I, pp. 491–492). Milan: Ricordi.
Nono, L. (2001b). Post-Prae-Ludium per Donau. In A. I. De Bendictis & V. Rizzardi (Eds.), Luigi
Nono, Scritti e colloqui. vol. I, p. 505. Milan: Ricordi.
Ramazzotti, M. (2007). Luigi Nono. Palermo: L’Epos.
Richard, A. & Mazzolini, M. (1996). Notes to the musical text. In A. Richard & Mazzolini
(Eds.), Luigi Nono. A Pierre. Dell’azzurro silenzio, inquietum (1985) a pi u cori, per flauto
contrabbasso in sol, clarinetto contrabbasso in si bemolle e live electronics. Milan: Ricordi.
Rizzardi, V. (1999). Notation, oral tradition and performance practice in the works with tape and
live electronics by Luigi Nono. Contemporary Music Review 18(1), 47–56.
Sallis, F. & Burleigh, I. (2010). Venetian soundscapes past and present: Studying a performance of
Luigi Nono’s A Pierre. Dell’azzurro silenzio, inquietum (1985), presented at the annual
meeting of the American Musicological Society, held in Indianapolis on 5 November. http://
www.ams-net.org/indianapolis
Sallis, F., Burleigh, I., & Rothery, E. (2010). Seeking virtual voices in Luigi Nono’s A Pierre.
Dell’azzurro silenzio, inquietum for contrabass flute, contrabass clarinet and live electronics
(1985). Presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian University Music Society held at the
University of Regina, 4 June. http://www.cums-smuc.ca/en/conference/conference-2010/68-
preliminary-schedule-of-sessions-programme-preliminaire-des-seances
Schaller, E. (2004). The classification of musical sketches exemplified in the catalogue of the
Archivio Luigi Nono. In P. Hall & F. Sallis (Eds.), A handbook to twentieth-century musical
sketches (pp. 59–73). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stenzl, J. (1993). Composition–conception. Nono’s Workshop. In Remarks on Découvrir la
subversion: hommage à Edmond Jabès and Post-Praeludium n. 3 ‘Baab-arr’ by Luigi Nono.
Milan: Ricordi.
Stenzl, J. & Haller, H.P (1993). Remarks on Découvrir la subversion: hommage à Edmond Jabès and
Post-Praeludium n. 3 ‘Baab-arr’ by Luigi Nono. Milan: Ricordi.
Taruskin, R. (1995). Text & act. Essays on music and performance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Williams, A. (2004). Ageing of the new: the museum of musical modernism. In N. Cook & A. Pople
(Eds.), The Cambridge history of twentieth-century music (pp. 506–538). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
438
Appendix 1 Sources conserved at the Archivio Luigi Nono37.

Source
number ALN catalogue Description Main content Musical content Annotations by Nono Title development Date Place of creation
1 53.01/01-06 Page of notebook Annotations by Nono No «DUETTO per P.B. » «DUETTO per P.B. » September 1985 Venice
(only f.02) during Prometeo’s
rehearsals
2 53.02/01-04 Photocopy of the VIII Photocopy of the VIII VIII section of Io, Annotations by Ciro [later annotation] [conjectural: end 1984– Venice [conjectural]
L. Zattra et al.
section of Io, section of Io, frammento dal Scarponi: «G. «pensieri a Pierre, a before 15 January
frammento dal frammento dal Prometeo NONO (Duetto dal Pierre Boulez x 3– 1985]
Prometeo. Loose Prometeo. Reference frammento Io, 85»
sheets score for the Prometeo)». Later
composition of A annotation by Luigi
Pierre. Working Nono, on the
material used for fotocopy of the
comparison during cover «pensieri a
the composition Pierre, a Pierre
(contrabass clarinet Boulez x 3–85».
and bass flute) Later annotation by
Nono: «FKB»
3 53.03/01-03 Music paper, 3 leaves: 2 Choice of pitches from Melody lines for the flute Several numeric «coralità a 2/due cori» [conjectural: end 1984– Venice [conjectural]
sheets (47632.5); 1 Io frammento and (bass flute) and the annotations within (f.01 sx). «Mille vele before 15 January
sheet (23.5632.5). various annotations contrabass clarinet the staves, numeric j Il cristallo di un 1985]
Brand name: G.B.T. (contrabass clarinet (1 or 2 notes per bar, structure for the mattino» (f.01 dx)
extra and bass flute) without duration). melodic choice,
Sheet 3 (sx, dx): 60 timbre annotations
bars duration
scheme for the
clarinet
4 53.04.01/01-04 Music paper, 4 leaves Choice of pitches for the Melodic study of the Idea of title, for bass «Le jour [???] [???] [conjectural: end 1984– Venice [conjectural]
(47632.5). Brand CKB (live electronics contrabass clarinet flute, contrabass Pierre. . ./per FB e before 15 January
name: G.B.T. extra mentioned for the (17 definitive clarinet and live CKB e live 1985]
first time) pitches) electronic electronics».
5 53.04.02/01-05, Music paper (47632.5). First rough draft of the ff. 02sx-dx and 03sx-dx Various annotations for [conjectural: end 1984– Venice [conjectural]
ff.01-03 Brand name: G.B.T. score (contrabass first draft the emission before 15 January
extra clarinet and bass technique 1985]
flute)
6 53.01/03-06 Various sheets, various Written annotations to No Written annotations to Pensieri a Pierre NO (f. [conjectural: end 1984– Freiburg [conjectural]
dimensions from improve the second improve the second 04V). A Pierre,/ before 15 January
different notebook draft of the score draft of the score Cantar e sonanze/ 1985]
(f.02 is source 1 in (f.02 is source 1 in Assonanze di
this table) this table) inquetum (f.05)
7 53.05/01-02 Music paper Annotations written on No Memorandum: from Definitive title: A Pierre. No Freiburg [conjectural]
music paper bass to contrabass Dell’azzurro silenzio,
flute inquietum a pi u cori
(continued)
View publication stats

Appendix 1 (Continued).
Source
number ALN catalogue Description Main content Musical content Annotations by Nono Title development Date Place of creation
8 53.04.02/01-05, Music paper (47632.5). Second draft of the score ff. 04sx-dx and 05sx-dx Title: ‘Pensieri altri a Pensieri altri a Pierre Freiburg [conjectural]
ff.04-05 Brand name: G.B.T. (contrabass clarinet Pierre’ and various
extra and bass flute) annotations for the
emission technique.
Nono adds coronas
9 53.04.03/01-06 Music paper Third draft (for bass In red (dynamics) and A Pierre altri pensari 20-02-1985 Venice
flute with purple
indications for the
transposition, note
by note)
10 53.08.01/01-18 Music paper Fair copy for the first Definitive manuscript. First page of the score: 20-02-1985, 2-05-1985 Venice
performance for For contrabbass «x l’esecuzione 1» (letter)
contrabass flute and flute. Live electronic [«for the 1st
contrabass clarinet patch (f.03) performance» (f.04)].
Letter for Boulez,
(f. 02) date: Venezia,
2-5-85
11 53.07.01/01-06 Music paper Photocopy of the fair For contrabbass flute Annotations by Scarponi 20-2-1985 Venice
copy with Scarponi, and Haller
Haller and Nono
annotations.
12 53.07.02/01-25 Music paper Photocopy of the fair For contrabbass flute Annotations by Nono, 20-02-1985 Venice
copy with Nono «‘life [sic]
annotations. electronic’, ‘live
elektronik’
13 53.09.01/01-04 A4 sheets (29.7 x 21) Live electronics scheme Other annotations by 20-02-1985 Venice
(by Haller) Nono
14 53.10/01-06 Music paper Fair copy, Concert use Annotations by Roberto 20-02-1985 Venice-Florence
with Fabbriciani Fabbriciani
annotations
15 ALN, Smn G 23 Print score Score (first edition) Ricordi editore, Milano 1995 (from 1985 Ricordi edition
version)
16 ALN, (3 copies) Print score Score (definitive edition Ricordi, Milano 1996 Ricordi edition
Smn (A. Richard and M.
E 4, Smn E 5, Mazzolini)
Smn E 6
439

Studying Luigi Nono's A Pierre. Dell'azzurro Silenzio, Inquietum (1985) As A Performance Event

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

Studying Luigi Nono's A Pierre. Dell'azzurro Silenzio, Inquietum (1985) As A Performance Event

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Studying Luigi Nono's A Pierre. Dell'azzurro silenzio, inquietum (1985) as a

Article in Contemporary Music Review · October 2011

Laura Zattra Jan Burle

Collaboration in Electrocoustic Music / Musical Assistants View project

Analysis of Sound Design Practice View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Contemporary Music Review

Studying Luigi Nono's A Pierre.

Available online: 20 Apr 2012

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07494467.2011.665579

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-

Studying Luigi Nono’s A Pierre.

ISSN 0749-4467 (print)/ISSN 1477-2256 (online) ª 2011 Taylor & Francis

(1) Nono’s autograph manuscript;

Figure 2 Luigi Nono, A Pierre, autograph manuscript with annotations by Roberto

it quickly came to be seen as an inviolable musical text, whose meaning was to be

Experimenting with Sound and the Creation of a New Performance Tradition

sound production was based on innovative performance techniques, which the

Tracing the Genesis of A Pierre

is organised in a presumed chronological order because many of the sources are

Contemporary Music Review

Contemporary Music Review

Recording Performances of A Pierre at the Banff Centre

(1) reproduce a valid, representative performance of A Pierre, true to the work in

Twenty-nine tracks were recorded for each rehearsal/performance of A Pierre, with

instrument lines, and also for the reconstruction of the performance.

The recorded data documents respectively:

(1) the original sources of sound;

Ambisonic Recording Technology and the Plotting of Sound Displacement

long existence, the technology is generally considered marginal because the

loudspeakers, as well as in a dedicated periphonic listening space at Centre

simple cylindrical cartographic projection of the sphere. Figure 10 shows the

Figure 10 Orthographic (left, a) and cylindrical cartographic (right, b) projections of the

the performance should reinforce the auditory impression of a labyrinthine acoustic

Appendix 1 Sources conserved at the Archivio Luigi Nono37.

View publication stats

You might also like