Creatoing a new notation for untuned percussion

[Ryszard Pusz]

On recommendation of the highly reputable Jan Angermüller (www.elbsound.studio) to join this particular list of talented and experienced music software designers, I have a specific proposal directed to you.
I am looking for an experienced software designer to collaborate with me on digitising a very new and original font designed specifically for the untuned percussion medium. I have already completed the groundwork by developing a logically consistent series of purposed noteheads and articulation markings, guided by two principles – how to make the notation convenient for composers to apply, and how to make it easy for players to read.
As a brief background - with a long history of experience in the field, I have identified – together with many other percussionists and composers - the frustrations and wasted technical and creative energy associated with the lack of an appropriate and standardised notation. Currently, untuned percussion composition and playing is seriously shackled by the inadequate and unsuited notation systems designed for tuned instruments and imposed on this medium of over 100 instruments. It has reached a stage of urgency to replace this ad hoc approach to notation and its lack of clarity in imparting playing directions. . As musicians yourselves you may well appreciate this untenable situation.
Simply, it demands for untuned percussion, a very new and targeted notation system capable of standardisation and elaborated with more calibrated directions that identify the unique requirements of the untuned medium. As said earlier, I have developed just such a system but now it needs digitisation.
And so I defer to you designers of fonts and submit this proposal to they who may be interested in joining me:
To create the digitisation of this new and original font specifically developed for clear and standardised playing directions of the untuned percussion medium - and so take it to this next critical stage of standardised music development.
If this exciting proposal to target the integrity of untuned percussion and its practitioners appeals to any amongst you, we can discuss more detail and also the terms under which to proceed. I look forward to hearing from you.
Ryszard Pusz
www.ryszardpusz.com

[OCTO]

As a performer (though not a percussionist) and a composer, I find this quite interesting.  Indeed, there are numerous challenges commonly associated with writing for percussion ensemble instruments.  In my experience, there are established rules typically outlined in instrumentation books or specifically in percussion instrumentation manuals, which have always served as a useful starting point.

Personally, I don't find writing for percussion frustrating due to the lack of standardised notation.  From what I understand, there are certain rules alongside a degree of freedom, which percussionists learn for each score.  For instance, I have seen, in some old scores, Gran Cassa written in the bass clef with (
is usually indicating auxiliary notes!), which in practice denotes a tremolo of a single sound, here even unpitched.  This might seem counterintuitive at first, but once understood, it poses no problem.

However, attempting to make change on a global scale is a far more challenging task.  There are simply too many schools of thought and performances.  To be heard and accepted, one would need to be a true master in the field, or extremely major composer (such as Stravinsky).  What I can suggest is that you could contact the fifty most prominent schools and universities across the world to present your proposal.

I'd like to add a few minor, yet important, observations: any change in the visual output of standard notation is almost always met with rejection—there is basically no tolerance for new "smarter" symbols being introduced.  I believe that since the late 1800s, there have been over 900 different notation proposals, all of which have ultimately led to nothing.

[Ryszard Pusz]

Thank you for your comments. Current notation is predicated upon the premise that each particular action will replicate the same result, in this case, the same sound; and this can be notated with the one symbol – a note. For instruments of 12-tone tuning this is an effective method of imparting playing directions – beautiful in its simplicity. However, when that particular action, depending on where it is directed on the instrument, what implement is used, and type of action employed, can elicit one of up to 20 characters of sound, not one of which is aligned to 12-tone tuning, the notation fails.
This is where my notation is aimed, and this is what has consumed my last 4 years to the exclusion of all else.
I am aware that there could well be antipathy, but I am determined to present this approach to many. I will be contacting the various music academies, not just the “top 50”, thank you for your suggestion, and hopefully at the very least strike up meaningful conversations between composers and percussionists. If before I approach them there is a movement through this list to activate the notation the conversation I believe will be more powerful.
I have already discussed elements of the notation with people here in Australia and there has been a very positive reaction. It could be summed up as “where can I get this notation?” from composers and “yes this is very logical and easy to follow” from percussionists and other musicians.

[John Ruggero]

This is the one (and only) area of music notation where I think a new system might actually be able to gain some traction. Incidentally, your traditionally notated percussion scores are beautifully done, so that gives you a lot of credibility.

[OCTO]

Maybe you can present a snapshot of your proposal here.

At my university, the Royal College of Music in Stockholm, Mattias Sköld has proposed in his Doctoral thesis something that might interest you: Sound Notation: The visual representation of sound for composition and analysis

The problem with "new" symbols or notation is that it represents a new alphabet.  At times, it is considerably easier to read standard notation rather than a customised version.  However, custom notation can be quite effective and is often justified, as it simplifies the execution of complex sounds, as seen in some of Penderecki's earlier works.

My teaching premise is: "you should notate as simple as possible achieving the same result." meaning, among other things:
- no textual explanations; if needed, as short as possible (think you need to "pay for each character")
- no clutter
- remove redundancy
- no special symbols nor noteheads; only if impossible otherwise (as above described with Penderecki)
- no introductory pages for parts; all explanations should occur in the part, precisely as a footnote to the measure; as concise as possible ("pay for character")
- foolproof
- short explanation my words instead of numerous symbols within music
- etc.

[Ryszard Pusz]

Thank you John, twice over. In the process of working out the notation I set myself the task of applying it to my pieces and to more complicated musical settings than is normal. What I discovered is that I could expand the range of sounds on the individual instruments, and introduce a new approach to harmonic thinking. So I am keen to set the font creation in motion.

[Ryszard Pusz]

Thank you OCTO. I agree with your comments re ease of reading and standardisation. The simplified playing directions, usable with tuned percussion, readily and consistently identify:
1. which instrument is to be played in all multi-percussion set-ups;
2. what part of the instrument will elicit the specific musical effect;
3. which beater is to be used;
4. what part of the beater will produce the particular sound;
5. which specific articulation is relevant to each instrument and playing context; and
6. what manner of playing will evoke the composer’s musical intent.

Notation examples.pdf

(471.93 KiB) Downloaded 169 times

Thank you also for Mattias Sköld's thesis. I will look at it in the morning.

[OCTO]

I have taken a brief look at the document.  I would suggest that you transcribe some important music works for the percussion (Xenakis, Varese, Boulez, or similar) and simply make an endurance test.

Over a century ago, the French Academy of Letters and Arts deliberated on the need for a language reform.  They drew inspiration from Vuk Karadzic, the main reformer of the Serbian language, who had simplified the already complex Serbian language in the early 1800s.  Serbian adopted a phonemic orthography, where each letter corresponds directly to a sound, with the principle "write as you speak, and read as it is written."  This made reading Serbian straightforward for anyone familiar with the pronunciation of its letters.  For instance, the English word "the" would simply be written as "d."  This reform was successful for Serbian, that was in chaos at that time.  However, in France, such a reform was not embraced, as the critical mass did not find it valid, possible, or plausible for the French language.  

So, for a system to be used there is need for a critical mass to accept it.  If you are a composer, composing in that system would perhaps help you in spreading the idea; yet one has to be a very good composer in order to do it.  Rautavaara uses, for instance, a cross symbol (x) to represent a value augmented by 1/4 (so it means x = 5/4) but nobody uses it.

[Fred G. Unn]

Rautavaara uses, for instance, a cross symbol (x) to represent a value augmented by 1/4 (so it means x = 5/4) but nobody uses it.

Gardner Read mentions proposals for this in his book too. Seems easy enough to understand, but definitely never caught on.

read.jpg (469.05 KiB) Viewed 17685 times

[Fred G. Unn]

I just looked at the PDF too. I guess I see a few possible issues with widespread adoptation of these.

1) They are very "busy." Most notation developments tend to advance in the direction of easing sightreading. Look at some of the examples in the PDF and trace exactly how your eye interprets all the various elements. There is a lot of eye movement to look at and process all the information, which dramatically impedes sightreading.

2) Many of these elements are already in use by percussionists and mean something different. It's one thing to propose a new notation system, it's another to convince performers to retrain their eye to elements they already use. For example, many of these glyphs have different meaning than page 32 of the Norman Weinberg book "Guide to Standardized Drumset Notation." Latin percussionists familiar with common Conga and Bongo notation will immediately interpret the solid rectangle notehead and various triangle noteheads differently. That's a hurdle that will need to be overcome for wider adoption

3) As OCTO said, "there is need for a critical mass to accept it." You'll probably need to sell the concept on a popular composer or publisher to get widespread use. While possible in notation software, you'd probably need to get wider adoption with the software developers too. I might be wrong, but some of the glyphs do not seem like standard SMuFL glyphs, so you'd probably have to overcome that hurdle too.

Just my $0.02.