Volume 13 1984

INTEAFACE - Journal ot New Music Research - is an international journal devoted to discussion 01 all
questions which laa into the border~ne areas between music on the one haod, physical and human
sciences or related technologies on !he other. New fields of research, as well as new methods of
wwestigation in known fields. receive special emphasis.
In addition, shorter communications oooceming the descriptiotl of new apparatus. compositional de·
vices, short interviews, desaiptions of new computer programs. interim reports on current activities in
electronic studios. institutions. &le. are eligible for publicallon.

It is publiShed quarterly. lour Issues of approx. 64 pages seen tOl1Tling one annual volume.

Authors are invited to send manuscripts and all communications related to the following address:
InterfacI
The Edtors of Interlace
cia Swats Publishing Service
347b. Heereweg
2160 AH lISSE, The Netherlands

AI COITespondence concerning subsaiptiort!. and reprints should be sent :0 the publishers: Journal of New Music Research
Swets Pub~shing Service
347b, Heereweg
2160 AH USSE, The Netherlands Edlto,..

Jan L. Broeckx and Herman Sabbe

University of Ghent. Belgium
Jos Kunst and Frits C. Weiland
I Pllnle<lln The Nelhll~ands by OIl$lltdrukkerij Kanters 8.1,1 .. AIblasserdam University of Utrecht, the Netherlands
I Type-setting Ho! Studio. Rotterdam
Advisory EditOl"s
~ Copyright 1984 by Swet.s & ZEritWnger B.V _. Usse.

\ P, .. oies;;si().'£I :tdl:;r.::;of\"Jna-ra f'J ~ l.M-"7 ~ rTEr""", '7 :Fr,rra,.$ 7~'<: ':i"!M5$

Pierre Barbaud (Paris)
James Beauchamp (Urbana-Champaign)
Konrad Boehmer (Amsterdam)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'r:r it:r-a':"~ ;re -:rt-oo;r :.s<n .,...~~ wtr" 't"0!: -....X'.... q-r - ~ ~ John Chowning (Slanlord)
:.ara- I.",. : ". ::rr:wc:s:. t12£. 1:'E sa:e::. "e=:B" =:D ~ :ac ~ 1: N :::::. ::- :..~ ~ GioYarYli B. DebiaSi (Padoval
~ .. ~ :r-~!.. ~~~':!!<~ -::. ~~~ ~"~ ~;-;c Hubert S. Howe Jr. (New City)
2\'S"..:'3: ....JSS'<. "'"h1;, ~ Werner Kaegi (Utrechl)
Erhard Karkoschka (Stutlgar1)
Jean-Jacques Naltiez (Montreal)

'I Henri PouSSelJr (Liege)

Jean Claude Risset (Paris)
Ivo Supieie (Zagreb)
Stan Tempelaars (UtreCht)

I Barry Truax (Vancouver)

Knut Wiggen (Fredrikstad)

\
·1
-I
PUBLISHED BY
SWETS & ZEITUNGER B.Y. - USSE
 • d', ,.'~' ""vi ~ .... vu

".Ul>I"; III tll"; r\lf. A l':"aull) Lanuscapc - Here And There 199 " Swets & Zeitlinger

H~nning Lohner:
Interview with Peter Maxwell Davis 225
A System of Notation for Electro-acoustic Music:
A Proposition
Book Reviews 248
Louise Gariepy and Jean Decarie
Author Index

Berg, van den, J., 75

D6carie, J" I
Gnric!py, Louise, I
Haus, G., 107
Hubler, K.-K., 187
Kunst. J" 75
Lohner, H., 225
MacKay, J., 171
Paraskevafdis, Gabriela, 113 ABSTRACT
Post, Nora. 149
Sabbe, H., 161, 165,248.249 Eleclro-acouSlic music arose ala time when the nOlion of musical notation ;lself
Santoiemma, M., 1 15 wa~ the subject of profound qu('stioning. Differenl forms of score were written
Welsh. J" 199 for this new music, mOSt of them using nOlalion created "ad hoc", The authors
propose a notal;on system intended 10 produce "prescriptive" scores.
lIs main characterislics an~: ,
(I) lhal it is based upon a lhorough analysis of lhe "tcchnical gesture";
(2) that each symbol results from rules that allow easy integration of new
symbols:
(3) rhatlhe lay-oul of Ihe score makes "reading 3t sighl" easier by showing
clearly Ihe function of each eleme", of a fechnical device and the now of the I
I
audio signal.
,,
This research was initiated in a pedagogical context. But it provides us with a 1001
Ihat should become useful to the musicologists as well as to composers.

INTRODUCTION

Electra-acoustic music has existed for nearly 50 years and it is surprising that
composers still do not havc a common system of notation in a century in which
". technicians, ideas and artistic tendencies arc easily communicated from one
continent to another and in which international conferences, normalization
associations and scholarly publications, especi<'llly in the scientific and tech-

Manuscript received March 1983.

•
 no logical fields, tend to unify vocabularies, measuring units and symbols. One
. often hears that if such a system does not exist, it demonstrates that the need
does not exist. In our opinion, this statement is made too quickly: contempo-
rary instrumental music is in dire need of scores and yet composers, inter-
preters and musicologists all confront a comparable problem. if not to say a
controversy.
Many authors have thought about the problem of notation and musical
score and we do not intend 10 go over all of its facets. What we have to say
about it will strictly serve the purpose of providing a context for our research
and of emphasizing characteristics peculiar to electra-acoustic music, charac-
teristics that we wish to respect in the system we propose here.
Historically, electra-acoustic music arose at a time when a profound ques·
tioning of traditional musical notation and its essential functions made its
appearance.
The oldest (and probably the most permanent) of these functions was that
of mnemonic aid for musicians who shared common musical traditions and
customs; this explains the lack of precision in older texts: gregorian neumes,
figured-bass and even baroque or classical music ornamentation.
Then, as Sceger (1958) explains, notation was utilized more and more for
"prescripti\;e" purposes, first by the religious orders, then by composers. (The
term "prescriptive" still carries a somewhat negative connolation, when we
think of how extraordinary this tool, musical notation, was. Without notation,
the grealest master-pieces of accidental music would never have been brought·
to light and possibly would never even have been thought of by musicians. The '
fact that notation has allowed a few "monsters"' to exist, does not allow us to
accuse it, like Framjois Bernard Miiche (1978), of "inflated pretensions ... to ~
the point of having sound drown in paper-work".) (p. 35)
Inasmuch as a score had to transmit a musical idea from composer to
interpreter, obviously, it was "prescriptive" rathcr than "descriptive", if wt
use Seeger's terminology which so adequately illustrates the tendencies of the.
last few decades. However, as long as symbols and notal ion rules were known
and acceplcd by musicians sharing the same musical culture, a rcading of the
score allowed for an internal audition, for one to "hear it inside"; this was
solfcge, and musical dictation became corollary to the equation: score '"
music; a good ear, a musical car allowed its bearer to rewritc the score after
hearing it once the code had been assimilated, but more specifically, to rewrite
aperform{/lIcl!sco~e. The power to describe musical perception was therefore
implicitly' granted to traditional notation.
Three factors have stimulated the reappraisal of the traditional functions of
written musical notation:
a sound recording bec<lme a much more reliable "memory" than <lny kind of
score;
growing inlerest for non-European musical cultures showed how impossible
it was for a musician who had not deeply assimilated the conventions of
another culture, to use a performance score;
finally, the development of acoustical and psycho-acoustical knowledge
concurrently with the appearance of increasingly perfect measuring devices,
offered "scientific" tools to those who wished to create truly descriptive
scores.
Lengthy discussion about the profound transformations of Ihe concept of
notation itself is nOI within our immediate considerations. However, before
dealing with the electra-acoustic score, it is important to stress the fact that
differences and controversies cxtended far beyond thc context of this form of
expression.
~
Electro·aCOllstic scores
What happens in the cllse ofwrillen notation of electra-acoustic music? Costin
,Mieranu (1974) distinguishes four kinds of approaches toward this problem:
(I) No written score;
(2) Performance score;
(3) Reading diagrams;
(4) Listening transcriptions. t
"(l) The first approach is a total rejection of any form ofwrinen score. At first
"g!ance, one might believe that such an approach is motivated by the means of
production themselves:
--:the composer is his own interpreter and feels no need to "prescribe" to
-himself what 10 "play" and how to "play" his own music.
'~~composition and interpretation arc intimately related in studio work and a
,';-)score wriuen in advance would impose constraints on the creative process
tthat many have felt to be inacceptable .
. - finally, the finished product being recorded on tape, no wrillen score was
'required to transmit the music in time and space.
. " "But this approach, current at the beginning of "musique concrete" in the
lR.M, can be explaincd by a much more fundamental preoccupation. 'nlC
6:R.M. W;;lS in search of an exclusively aural experience, entirely freed from
·}th.e~search for the material causes of the musical sound. The fact that even a
4 LUUI~1:.lJAI{II.:i-'\ am] H:.AN O!;.Ct\1<.11.:.
"descriptive" score was rejected also implies that "classical" methods of
musicological analysis were contested.
(2) Other composers, morc often identified with "electronic music", have
produced performance scores in spite of the fact Ihat they were no more
necessary than (or "musique concrete". These scores arc all manifestly
"prescriptive"; moreover, thanks to the slUdio-laboratory tools themselves, it
seemed justified to hope for a level of precision such as developed in accidental
musical notation with unequal perfection. The firSI scores, amongst which the
most often quoted is" Elektronische Srudie 11" by Slockhausen. were meant to
be althe same time "prescriptive" and "descriptivc" and "Swdit· 11" docs nOI
constitute a break from the traditional score on the contrary! Frisius (1978)
demonstrates how this kind of score was appropriate for the early stages of
electronic music (we could extend this to umusique concrete" in which
"Tjmbr~s-Durees" by Messiaen would be equivalent to "Smdil' Jf'): genera·
tion of sound material playing a much morc important rolc than thc succc~ive
electro-acoustic transformalions which 3re applied to Ih~ sound matcrial.
As sound processing devices (especially the voltage·control devices) be-
came more numerous 3nd more sophisticatcd, transformations became musi-
cally essential. As a maller of fact they could bc considered as onc of the mosl
specific aspects of electro-acoustic music. At Ihe same time, the acoustical
description of lhe signals lost most of its musical interest, and composers
resolutely gave up on a realization score that would be at the same time a
listening score, or a "descriptive" one. The most striking examples of this
attitude are the scorcs of "Essay" and "TermillUS" by G. M. Kocnig. (See
example lA).
Musicians became conscious of the fact that in spite of extrcme differential
sensitivity in the human ear, musical performance itself allowed for and evcn
demanded wide margins of tolerance. AI thc samc time thc measuring instru-
ments used as sound generators and sound processors in the early studios
became musical instruments: the modules of the modern synthesizers. They
gained in musical spontaneity what they lost in scientific precision. Thus.
notating means of production rl1thcr than acoustical rarameters was certainlY:l
more fruitful choice.
,
(3) Another type of score is the reading diagram providing visual points of
refe.rence which enable the reader to follow the temporal evolution of a work
recorded on tape. The utilitary nature of these diagrams differentiates them
from the following category. Whether it is a "ghost" score destined 10 fulfil the
1\ ~)~JLM UI- NV1,\IIUN j'Vl{ t:.Ll:.Cjj{U-I\LUU~jICMUSIC 5
needs of a copyright society or whether it constitutes an indispensable com-
plement to the instrumental score (or mixed music, this type of notation holds
no artistic or musical interest whatsoever.
(4) The last category is related to the search by contemporary musicians for a
visual representation of aural perception. Such a score relies on equivalence of
sound and graphic or symbolic elements: in fact. it is a transcription. Kar-
koschka (1971) insists on the important relationship between the eye and the
ear: in his opinion, a score of the acoustical parameters or of the technical
means of a given piece could nOt only be of no help in understanding the music,
but even work against it. On the conuary, a complete and careful description of
the perceptive aspects helps the auditor to concentrate on some element or
other, and to discover more rapidly the many facets of a piece: and this all the
more when the music contains complex and new elements as in electronic
music. Research by B. L. Fennelly (1969) presents obvious musical interest.
One can hope that such a system, its symbolism, its conventions (and perhaps
its measuring devices so sophisticated as to acrount for physical parameters as
well as their p<.'rccptual dimension) will be unanimously approved and will
become a truly analytical tool.
Let us return to the performance score, since it constitutes the object of our
research. A wide range of definitions can be applied to electra-acoustic music.
Classifying as electro-acoustic any music in which sounds go through electro-
acoustic transmission devices before reaching the ear of the listener, seems a
liltle far-fetched. At the other extreme of opinion, Francis Dhomont (1980)
says that "electra-acoustic music is not a new instrument, or a kind of super
electric organ. It isn't the latest and most sophisticated in the string-instrument
industry... it is a fundamental error to consider the synthesizer or the computer
as an instrument: electra-acoustics is a field of investigation ... and what must
precisely be well understood is thal we 3re confronted with a specific mode of
thought (I).
Wherc do we stand between these two definitions? The synthesizer is used
by some groups of popular music, together with and equal to the piano, guitar
and saxophone: it is truly an instrument, an electric organ. Traditional notation
suits it, as it suits classical organ. The musician needs only a mnemonic diagram
(I) In french: Penscc specifique.
(such as the cards provided with the synthesizer AKS by EMS), to represent his
"patch", his links between modules and positions of the control knobs, in
short, like the register stops of the classical organ. Let us only say that this kind
of graphic representation is most of the time related to the make and model of
the synthesizer.
Long before popular musicians, composers have designated as "instru·
ments", groups of pieces of equipment that have become modules in the
modern synthesizer: the filter and the ring modulator which transformed the
square wave and the human voice 10 the point of making them unrecognizable,
could be considered like the resonance box and the bridge of the violin which,
acoustically, give color 10 and make more complex, the sound generated by the
bow on the violin string. In this regard and to continuc with the comparison,
written notation would be a kind of instrument-making treatise. Once the
instrument is fabricated, it is assigned a role in the musical score.
This is not every composer's idea and for many others, the idea of trans-
forming a source through a filter or a ring modulator is truly an operation, a
musical writing technique, such as inversions, transpositions or tonal modula-
tions were in traditional music.
With regard to notation, this conception is certainly more demanding than
the preceding ones. If the notation used proves satisfaClory for it, then it will
certainly be satisfactory for the first two,
No matter which aesthetic criteria of musical language, it must be recog-
nized that techniques and devices used jlre very closely related: common
notation for the realization of a piece should present less difficulties than a
"descriptive" notation. This idea is not a new onc and an important step was
taken at the Ghent International Conference of 1974. Composers present at
the electro·acoustic workshop made a valuable proposition and we would still
do them justice in saying that this was a beginning, a rough sketch devised
during few days of reflexion.
Before elaborating on the system we propose, it is important to specify the
context which stimulated further renexion. Our main preoccupation was the
structuring of practical workshops for a course in "Electro+acoustics" designed
for musicians but not exclusively for composers. We had many goals and the
most constraining were:
to have the students experiment in a studio, most of the "classical" and the
recent techniques in electra-acoustic music:
to avoid being unfair to non-composerstudents who so often felt "empty" in
·front of a "blank pagc" (in this case, a blflllk tapc); for this reason they all
had to be cast in a role of interpreter;
to minimize the "school-homework" character of. the piece and encourage
some form of musical expression;
to make the students as autonomous as possible and encourage them to find
their own solutions to the practical problems arising when a prescribed
arrangement had to be realized even if not described in all its details.
,:> Pulling together all these objectives forced us to face the very concrete (and
not theoretical) problem of notation and prescriptive score forelectro-acoustic
music, It wasn't a mauer of devising a notation for onc piece of work; we had to
find a system capable of adjusting to the "classical" techniques as well as
adapting to actual and future technological developments. In addition the
system had 10 be more than a manual of instruction, a recipe book; it had to be
an aid to the student-interpreter who analyzes the technical gesture, who looks
for the composer's musical intention, who uses a model to be completed,
modified and even surpassed.
The system dcveloped around many discussions, confrontations with sco-
j res of known works, questionings and new beginnings. Now, we find it opera-
tional and the results obtained in the pedagogical context are sufficiently
~atisfying to be offered to a wider audience. It remains tentative and we hope
that others who share our preoccupations will consider it, comment on it and
help us to perfect what should, before anything else, be an instrument of
communication.
~.!
PROPOSITION FOR A NOTATION SYSTEM
j
r
We shall consider a piece as a set of imerrelated systems, each having its own
finality. Three types of finality correspond to the technical steps 10 be taken:
(I) The production of sound materials
(2) The lemporal arrangement of the sounds and the mixing (intensity rela-
tions and spatialization)
'> (3) The diffusion in concert
1 '1..... , It should be noted that a pyramidal relationship exists between these steps
of the realization of a piece. Wc can say that I is a sub-set of2 which in turn isa
sub-set of 3.
8 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECfRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 9

A. PRIMARY SYSTEM (PS),

CHART I THE SYSTEIIS
This is the system corresponding to the first type of finality mentioned above:
the production of sound materials.
R£SllT EtEIl019 J TECllllICAl m,s
It is a set made of e1emcnts defined by the functions praper:
,.SoURCE SET (1) The source
SOUllD IIATERIM. (2) The transformer
PRIIlARY THEREFORE NECESSARILY ELEIIJITS-(.nTRANSFORl1ER SET
AUDIO (3) The "former"l*
mm ALTIIOUGK MlIT NECESSARilY
HEARD AS SUCH III THE
'. rORIIER su
B. SECONDARY SYSTEM (SS)
". ..
fINISHED mCE ht STEP, GENERATION OF SllUNO STRl/UURES REMlY
TO BE USED lit ANOTHER SYSTEII.
PS OR 55•
This system corresponds to the steps of editing and mixing; its finality is the
- AT LEAST Ilia. temporal and dynamic organisation of the sound materials. The elements are:
1. The sources, primary systems or primary sources (these will be defined
later)
.'_ SOURCE SfT
SECONOARY FINISHED PIECE ELEIIENIS <:" 2. The set of procedures associated with its finality.
-" PROCEDURE SET The finished piece before its diffusion constitutes the result.
SYSTEII efFORE ITS
PERFDRIIANCE 2nd STEP .
TEIIPORAl. C. TERNARY SYSTEM (TS)
" OYIIMIC --.':. llR6RIIlIATlON
SPATIAL"
.
This is the system organising the diffusion (in concert). The elements are:
1. The sound sources to be emitted: these are the highest index SS output(s)
(the index of the SS is defined on p. 27).
III TECHNICAL TER"S, THE SS CORRESPONDS TO 1· 2. The emission device.
T!fE STEPS OF EDITING AND IIIltNG

t
~., Chart 2
ELEn£NTS~:'-' SOURCE SET
TERNARY PIECE
-"[111551011 DEVICE
SYSTEII PERFORIIED THE PRIMARY SYSTEM (PS)
3rd SHP: PRESCRIBES -THE TECHNICAL OEVICE
III CONCERT -THE SCORES OF ALL
T5 IIUSICIANS AND/OR OF oi A. THE ELEMENTS
THE TECHNICIAN-DIRECTOR
AT THE II111N6 CDNSOLE . The constitutive elements of the system are:
',~, (1) The source
~~ (2) The transformer
-.;. (3) The former
Chart 1

DEFINITION OF THE SYSTEMS

¥; 1. Definitions

,, 1.1 The source

General definition: A set of methods, procedures and devices, the elements of This is the emitting element of the system. It is the sound material to be
which are in interaction with each other in order to pro- transformed by the other elements.
duce a result.
• To avoid text interruption, notes, references llnd comments will be brought together
Definitions specific to an electra-acoustic piece: at the end. p. 15.
10 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECfRQ-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 11

, Although this list will possibly be modified, care should be taken that each
""'T 2 THE PRIMRY SYStEII new piece of equipment be classified according to the set and sub-set which
, correspond to its main function.
ElEIIUTS nEFllIlTIOH srt COMTEIfT I a..ASSIFlCUllIl
2.1 The source·set ami ifS sub-sets
EIUmHS El£llENT OF THE SYSTEM SAl SYIfTlETlC
""'Ct SI: TElECOIlllUlIlCATlOJS A primary system may have as its source, either one (or several) primary
SOOHD nATERII'll THAT VILt BE se: ACOUSTIC source(s), or the result of another primary system. (Later we will introduce the
SET TRANSFORIIED. ps: PRlIlARr SYSm OF LOWER
INDEX. concept of index).
Primary sources belong to three categories. They were classified according
totheir nature. We have chosen these types of primary sources because of their
ElEIIENT THAT 110DIFlES THE SOURCE TA: VOLTAGE COIlTRDllA&LE
PRllCESSlJ.lIS recurrence throughout electro-acoustic works.
TRAIISfORIIER IIUST HAV'E AA IHf1JT AND AN OUTPUT TI: NON VDLTMiE-COHlROLLABlE A. Synthetic primary sources
PROCESSlMIS
SET TIlE OUTPUT IS ALIIAYS TC: '1lUSlllUE CONCRUE'IIAHIf1JlATIO!CS B. Primary sources coming from telecommunications
AM AUDIO SIGNAL AKO PROCEDURES.
C. Acoustical primary sources.

FA: PURE FCllllIER

"
N.B.: The main difference between Band C lies in the fact that in B, the
FORMR OPERATES 011 SPECIFIC PAIIAltET£R$ f.: SEHSDRS sources were not produced specifically for the needs of the piece.
Of THE SOURCE AfIlO/OR Ft: AMY SOURCE OR TRAIlSfORIIER
sn OF THE TRttHSFORJ'I£R OUTPUT II5EO TO CONTROL SIGNAL
ps: PS OF lOIlER IHDEI USED AS Ft 2.2 The transformer set
First we must say that the transformer cannot be the result of another system.
We can distinguish between two types of transformers by their functions: the
processors (A and B) and the manipulations (C).
1.2 The (ransformer 2 . A. The V.c. processors. These are the modules or pieces of equipment
The function of this element is a total or partial modification of the source. It is built to receive an audio source, to act on it and to present it modified at their
the unit of treatment inside the system. 11 nIllSI have an input and an output, output. Their action can be contingent on voltage applied to them.
and its output is always an audio signal. B. Non~ V.c. processors. The equipment is the same as in A but instead of
being contingent on voltage, its action depends only on a manual action.
1.3 The former There is no essential difference between the two and the situation in A or B
This element operates on a specific parameter of the source and/or of the depends mainl), on the state of the technology. Therefore they are inventoried
transformer, whether the action is automatic or manual. It is the programma· t< together but in the description of the systems, the distinction between A or B
ble control unit of the system. should be retained because some of them are only possible with type A
processors.
2. Classification C. The manipulations. This kind of transformer links together certain
J;,> pieces of equipment or accessories (not originally designed as transformers)

Now we will consider the elements described above as sets, themselves com-
posed of sub-sets. The specific pieces of equipment or modules are the ele-
ments of these sub-sets. Because these elements might change and because
some will appear while others will become obsolete, their listing (Chart 8A and
8B) will be regularly revised.
:"I: and the manner in which they are used to manipulate or transform the source.
These manipulations come mostly from "musique concrete" and have become
classic procedures in electro-acoustic music.
12 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECfRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 13
2.3 The former set
SC-30'" 3
The former is a functional concept grouping different types of equipment S: Primary source
classified under three sub-set headings: C: Acouslicnl
A. The "pure" former. This is the former that produces the voltage that 30: Humnn produced sound
will control the source or the transformer of the system, i.e. the former which 3: Laughter
does not need a source. However, il can be triggered off by:
a source TB- 15
a trigger
T: Transformer
another former
B: Non V.-c.
B. The detector. This is the former which extracts from onc of the para. 15: Parametric equalizer
meters of a source-signal applied to it, the values which allow it to generate the
control signal. (The source-signal can be an audio signal or another control TC-16
signal).
T: Transformer
C. Any sOllrce or transformer output which can be used as a control si~nal. ,
C: ManipUlation
Precisely for this (unction, these elements then lose their property of source or 16: Speed controller
transformer; they must be analysed as part of the former-set and arranged
accordingly on the score (see p. 23, and example 2B). FA-12
F: Former
3. The code representing the elemenls or the PS} A: Pure
12: Envelope generator
Each piece of equipment, module or manipulation is identified by a code.
FB-II
The code has the form: Cl C~ - x-*, n F: Former
B: Detector
Cl : a capital letter indicates the set (5- T-F)-
11: Envelope follower
C~ : a capital leller indicates the sub-set (A-8-C)
x : the number indicates the precise element, according to the classifica-
tion (Chart 8) The code is useful for the analysis of the piece, or to place on a score the
n : whcll several elements have the same code, we assign a number to this symbol of an clement specifically described on another "index-card" (see
code. (This is not pan of the classification and applies only to a below, p. 23). It also avoids unnecessary symbols, for example, S8-10 signifies
particular piece.) a source on a record, the turn-table is implicit :lIld needs no specific symbol.
Acoustic sources will always be represented by a code referring to a precise
description given on the bottom of the "index-card" or in a complete list of the
Examples
acoustic sources al the beginning of the score.

SA-1O
SA: Primary source 4. Levels or (ormaliz:.IlioR (Sce chart 4)
A: Synthetic
10: precision sinus generator There arc two levels of formalization of the primnry system.
 14 LOUlSE GARIEPY <lnd JEAN DECARIE 15
4.1 Leve/I;
The elements of the system are represented by the generic symbols (capita(
letters) used to establish the code
The audio signal is indicated by vertical arrows
' " ,
~,
",
[>1.,..
~

>
. ,
o

~ The control signal is represented by the horizontal arrow. < •

~ >

4.2 Level 2:
The elements of the system are represented by specific symbols and links which
clarify the relationship between the elements.

5. The symbols (Chart 3)4

All the electra-acoustic devices, including the Typ!; C transformers, are rep-,
~

,
,
• ,
& Er
resented by specific symbols. The most important aspect of a symbol is its ! "
··
"generic shape" which identifies the nature of the element (source-transfor-
mer-former) and its action.
A good number of specific symbols were determined from these generic~
[) .1
,
shapes. Their complete description can be found in the Appendix 2.
The symbols may be modified and/or completed when those described in
~
~
,·, ,.," J

·,
··, ",~,
Chapler IV do not appear suitable for a required device. The technical action
of this device should be analysed and the new symbol should respect the 1 "

,, .
(ti·,..
generic form rule. In any event, the composer will have to give a complete list ' < •
..... ,:.
' .. u.u_.
of the equipment to be used at the beginning of the score, the corresponding
··
j .:.r-~!!
symbols as well as the modifications added if such is the case, and sometimes "
,
even the name of the manufacturer of the equipment.
,
In turn, the technician who wishes to perform an electro-acoustic score ;~
might have to use other pieces of equipment than those prescribed, as long as
_.
" ~

~-----_._--='."
~

they retain the function intended by the composer.

Many devices used in composition as well as in sound recording studios
merely "box" together several simple earlier modules (as for example the
sample-and-hold and its clock, or the pitchshifter with a delayed feed-back), or (
many identical elements (like the graphic and parametric equalizers).
In the first case, two or more independant symbols will be used.s
In the second case, composite equipment will be either represented by one
generic symbol or by an assembly of specific symbols and links. If this turns out
10 be too complex and cumbersome for the "card-score" (sec below), its code
is enlered in the proper location on the score, which refers to another "card- D <J
index", or to another area on the same "card-index" (examples 48 and 4C). ,
 16,--_---, 17
f}
6
B-
~
~ •
5
,"
0
,
G,
•
~
!
E
~ .;
-•
'".
JJJ!,ml H H} I
~
u
. -....,
~
"
o
~
0
~
1-----+---"="'"1---+': - - - - - - - :0:1-_--"'--1
§;,o
~
~
~
•
, ~
•
~
~ § §
~D
.-0 0
l5~
~ 0 is Ir'-'"
0
~; k §lQ ~
~. 0 ~. ~~
~~
0
~
".
~~
?
" c
5-
~~
~~
c_
--'0
s~ .....
c.
~
~~
 s. r ."f

18 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECTRO-ACOUSTlC MUSIC 19
5.1 The lape recorder ,

1
Because of the many uses of this device in electra-acoustic music, it calls for
special consideration. ~
Audio signd
(a) as a passive reproducer of previously recorded source(s) or system(s), !I
needs no specific symbol. It should be enough to write the codc(s) of the
source(s) or systems(s) on the score. Control sign.1
(b) if the result of a system must be recorded, because of subsequent
treatment, the composer will use the symbol TC.IO. b

(c) The same symbol will be used for Iype C transformations, with specific
adaptations, if the source to be transformed is on the tape (forexamplc editing; 0( •
inversion, loop).
(d) When a type C transformation requires the use of onc or morc tape
recorders and the tape is not supporting the source but an active part of the
transformation, the rectangular shape becomes a square. The tape itself is only Addition of signah l.udia or
partly represented (like the tape delay) or completely eliminated (like the tape contrail tourd the sur input.
echo). This prevents overburdening the symbol, the links often being execs--
sively complicated.

5.2 Otf/er implicit devices Shunting of I sign.1 f.udiD or

controll tDurd uvrrd IDduhs.
Other devices of which the original function is a transmission as perfect as
possible of the signal (principally the transducers, the faders, and the am-
plifiers) are generally implicit. They will be notated with their own symbols
only when they arc considered as active in a system. They arc then pan of the
Input Sel!ct~r 11l Output S!hctDr(2l
transformer set or of the former set. For example. a microphone explicitly
represented on a score under a source-code and followed by other Iransfor-i
mation modules means that the musician should hear the result of the system at~
the same moment that he plays. The source should not be recorded and
transformed later.
..1-
~~g. I: The links and the switches

6. The links (Fig. I)

Apart from representing the connections 10 be made between devices, the,
links specify the relalionship between these elements of the system.
A simple arrow represents the audio signal
An arrow with an empty circlc rcpresents the control signal
An arrow with a darkened circle represents the trigger signal.
The head of the arrow must be nO(atcd at the input point of a signal into a
module.
Where two links meet, or a link subdivides into two or more, the head of the
,£,arrow can be replaced by a black dot, as in electronic diagrams, as long as no
... ambiguity subsists as to the direction of the signal(s).
'- The use of an audio mixer to add or subdivide signals is never specified,
again to avoid burdening the indexeard. The technician-interpreter must
decide which is the best way to actualize the links.
7. The switches
Although they often take the form of voltage-controlled modules. the switches
20 LQUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECTRa-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 21

will be treated as variable links, and will be shown on the score only if they arc
active in the system.
The symbols will be adapted to the number of inputs and/or outputs. (Fig.
only gives two simple examples).

8. The parameters

Most parameters (frequency, duration, bandwidth) arc inscribed inside lhe

symbols. If a given parameter requires verbal instruction, a number in braquets
refers to a note at the bottom of the card/score. (Example 3).

The intensity is indicated on the output link of the specific symbol (even if,
on most synthesizers, the control faders are physically located at the input of
the following module).
Must of the time the fader is implicit; it will be represented only if its
adjustment needs special care (Example SB) or if it is to be tlclive in the system
(Example sq.

Intensity values can be indicated:

- either in dB (in relation to a precise reference) .,
~ ~
- either in Volts
either by numbers corresponding to values or groups of values defined on
••
>- ~
.~
the index-card or in the introduction of the score (Example 4B).
,'. .!'
B. THE CODE OF THE PS (Chart 4)h

The PS code contains indications about its nature and its relation with the other . ,•
·..
~

• 0

systems. It has the form: PS-i-T-#-np

" ,,,
o
w

I. The cOllccpl (If index: i ".. S

The result of a primary system can become source or former in unother system.
,. ·~ ..~
"··.
The index somewhat tells how many successive transformations preceded the " rl •
.
realizution of the system in question. ul"'"
> w.
A PS only made of primary elements is an index i "" I w'"
WH
w ~ 5
A PS of index i> I necessarily contains a system of index i-l ~ 0 "'

<~'"
Note that the transformer is always primary.
The index itself is not necessarily related to the complexity of the system.
Technically. it traces the number of steps neccssary for the production. In this ,i
22 LOUISE GARJEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECTRa-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 23
sense it often depends on the available equipment and the ability of the former. The letters A.8.C. represent the different categories defined abovc. If
technician-performer; if he is able to, nothing prevents him to realize two the set contains several elements, "and/or" must be read, instead of the
successive systems in a single step. comma (,).

3. The number: *' 11

Musically, however, the composer's choice of notating as two distinct
systems, two devices which could have been natated together, indicates a
specific musical concern. A system forms a complete and autonomous entity,
its result must be heard and recognized as such, before entering the next system
even though it might completely disappear from the final product.
The number distinguishes betwecn systems which have the same index and the
same type. These PSs might originate from different index-cards (like in the
example of Chart 4), but they might also be variants of a single device
(Example 18 and 58).

2. System types: T (Chart 5) 4. Power: *' liP

At level 1 of formalization, any PS can be classified within one of the six
possible combinations of the sQurcc-transformcr-former e1cmcnts. A device oftc n si multa ncously producl:s two or more different results recorded
On Chart 5, the lettcrs S.T.F. designate the sets: source, transformer, on different tracks of a tape-recorder.
Theoretically, they are separate systems but practically, they must be
~Mll SISI~ !TI'B represented and realized as a whole. They will be separately identified by the
power symbol. (In this case, it is not a matter of variants as in 3.) (Example IB).
lTl'£ 1 mE 4

.
f, ~,I,t, ~Si_1
C. GRAPHIC NOTATION OFTHE PS: THEPRIMARYSCORE(Fig. 2)
S, A,l", ~S'_ ,
I
The primary score is made of a set of cards, each representing a primary system
I:A,I" 1: ~
(PS). PSs arc formalized at level 2.

A card contains:
mEl !lP( 1

~
F: A,I,e, 'Si-! 1. The code proper (as explained in B)

Is: , I
~
2. Reference
1: A
This information is most interesting in a pedagogical context. A reference
index contains the cards representing the "classical" systems. Some of them
mEl lifE •
I f, ~,I,C, are transcriptions from known pieces of composers and the reference makes
" I.t.~"
'1 ,.1/", ,2 '1
" 1nl'!"
,I ondl" ,Z '1 I '5'_'1 explicit "quotations" possible. The reference code contains no index because
rI, ~,I,e, PS I_d 1 s: ! we think that often a system preserves its identity even when the source is
modified. (Example 3).
j F: ~,I,C, '5 h 1 [ ;, l,i,e, '5,-<1 )
1: ~ ~J ' ~( I

L ____ ~ ____ J
24 LOUlSE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECTRO·ACOUSTIC MUSIC 25
3. Description or Iille
I 1. Cooe I While consisting of an important quantity of modules or pieces of equipment,
some systems arc characterized by one particular device and it appears inter-
2. REFERENCE
3, TITLE OR esting 10 emphasize it. But often, the composer (or performer) wishes to give a
DESCRIPTIO name to a system which evokes the sound content better than the code does.
(Example 5C).

4, DEVICE 4. The device at level 2 of formalizalion

This constitutes the score proper. 1 It is laid out according to cenain rules which
r - - -- - - - 1
allow rapid visualization of the functions of thc differcnt elements.
The now ofthe diagram reads from top 10 bottom. 8 The source(s) are to the
r - - -- - - --,
FORMER SET

SOURCE SET
I
I I left of the upper corner; lower down but still on thc left, is the transformer set.
Thl: furmer ~et i~ un the right and its symbols, if possible, arc plClced slightly
I
I I I I higher than those of the element(s} on which it operates.
I I I The arrangement is rather imporlanl. It avoids confusion as to the audio
I
I I I nuw e:,pl:dally when the furmer so:t contains a PS. The arrangement clearly
I indicates that the audio content will not go through the device,that is, it will not
L -- - - -- --.J
I I be present whether transformed or not in the sound result of the given system.
I (Example 28).
I
- - - - --,
r - TRANSFORMER I I
I I 4.1 u~·C!
of lubd\'
SET I I
If a card-score cannot include all the elements of a complex device (represen-
I I L ------- ...j
ted by onc PS), a label (a capitalleltcr inside a circle) enables onc to continue
I I the scorc 011 a second card. It is impOrlant 10 avoid confusion between the
I I concept of index and of label. The second card is pan of the same PS which
I I retains its character of autonomous functional set.
I

L_~
JI
4.2 The (uJdress
4.2 ADDRESS
6. STORAGE
J An arrow indicates each PS output and it is pointcd towards the squarcs in
which each one'scodc is written. From the squares, other arrows lead to one or
several other squares (address(es» containing the codes of the systems (pri-
5, VERBAL INSTRUCTIONS mary or secondary) in which sound materials produced by the PS will be
[IME DEPENDENT ACTIONS
XTRA INfORMATIONS re-used.

5. Verbal instructions
Even if the use of codes, symbols and conventions enormously reduces the
amount of verbal indicalions, the laHer often remain necessary, either to
explain the author'~ intent, or to disclose timc dependcnt actions. Thus. onc
FIg. 2: The card-score; PS
26 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECfRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 27
can find on a PS score elements proper to the secondary system and time is then
represented on the horizontal axis (Example 5B). CHART 6 THE SECOMDARY SYSTE~

Furthermore in the same space, one will always be able 10 utilize elcmcnlS
proper to Iraditional notalion: melodies. chords, rhythms to be played on the ElEIIEKTS DEFINITION SET CONTENT
keyboard or with the aid of a scquencer.
EIIITTING ElEII~T OF THE SYSTEII PR1IIARY SYSTE~ OF ANY IMOEI.
SlllRCE
6. Storage location SuUHD IIATERIAl THAT WIll BE PR1IIARY SOURCES AS DESCRI&ED iH
SET HEA~D IN THE FIHISHED PiECE. THE P~IMA~Y SYSTEM.
This information is written in by the technician-performer and is only used 10
locate the system quickly, once it has been recorded on a tape. In the same
manner, 10 avoid any confusion, the code oflhe system should be written (or 'COM-PDSI1I0H' - EOiTlN6
PROCEDURE - SYNCHRONIZATION
spoken) on the tape. (iN THE fP.OPER IIEANIN61 - SPACIAlllATION
SET - DVNAMIC PROFIlIN6
Chart 6 OTHER TRANSFOPJlATiOIlS AS
D!SCR1~EO IN THE PRIIIARY SYSTEM.
Il THE SECONDARY SYSTEM (SS)
The primary system corresponded 10 the description orlhe production stage of
the sounds of a piece, usually preserved on an audio tape. 2. The lrans£ormalions
The next step consists in the temporal organization. The sounds arc or- Editing and ~ynchronization need no specific symbols. They are graphically
dered on separate tracks, (preferably on a multi-Irack t:lpe recorder); then represented on the secondary score.
comes the mixing: this includes designing the dynamic profiles, the spatializa- The processors used in this stage of production nevertheless retain their
tion, and most of the time, more processing. primary character and arc represented by their specific symbols as described
These considerations are theoretical. In practice, the systems (primary, for the primary system.
secondary and ternary) are never so clearly separate. Thus. 10 skip one gener-
ation the technician may well decide to send the result of the last primary B. THE CODE OF THE SS
system of a sound material directly on one track of the multi-track tape- It is in the form: SS - i-x '*'np
recorder, where it is required by the secondary score. In the same manner, if 1. The index (i):
the dynamic profiles devised for the material arc 100 complex to be realized is determined in the same manner as the primary system: an SS of index 1
when mixing all the tracks, it can be done when the signals arc sent to the contains only primary systems and/or primary sources. An SS of index i>!
multi-track machine. The same goes for panning. The composer will want to contains at least one SS of index i-I.
avoid redundacy on the score. If the dynamic profiles and/or the panning 2. The second number (x): represents the number of tracks necessary for its
instructions appear on the primary score, these should not recur on the realization.
secondary score. The disadvantage of this is that the secondary score is then 3. The third number (#n): distinguishes between SSs with the same index and
rendered less useful as a reading score. (Example 6 A and Bl. the same number of tracks.
4. The power symbol (#np): identifies the different outputs of the SS. For
A. THE ELEMENTS OF THE SS sler('ophonic mixes,
The elements arc: 1 is used for left
1. The sources 2 is used Cor right.
Generally, they arc PSs already recorded on tape (except in the case of live
music) or primary sources.
28 LOUlSE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECTRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 29
Example: $$-03-16 *2 2 Chart 7
SS: Secondary system
03: index i =: 3, at least onc track is filled with an SS of index i=2. III THE TERNAR Y SYSTEM (TS)
16: 16 simultaneous tracks arc required.
2: This is the second 5$-03-16 The ternary system corresponds to the concert performance of the electro-
2: This code is for the left channel output. acoustic work.
As wc have seen for the PS, the code indicates the intention of the
composer. The technician-performer lllust stul!y the score and do..:ciJc, depen- A. THE ELEMENTS OF THE TS
ding on the available equipment and on his own competence, whether inter- 1: the source(s) to be emitted
mediary steps arc necessary. An SS meant to be mixed in a single step on a 2: lhe emission device
24-tracks tape-recorder (55-01-24) might be realized as an 55-03-16 in a
morc modest studio. B. THE CODE OF THE TS
It has the form: ST - T - x X Y
C. GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION: THE SECONDARY SCORE 1. Syslcm typcs: T"
The secondary system is what comes closest to the traditional musical score They arc related to the source-set of the TS. Any source-set can be classified
and has therefore caused the least problems to the composers. The arrange- within one of the following combinations:
ment wc suggest seems quite "classical". (Example 6A and 68). I - Magnetic tapers)
The score is divided in to more or less large spaces, depending on what is 2 - "Live" electronic sources
needed. These spaces represent the tracks carrying the PSs (or, on occasion, 3 - Tape{s) and "live" electronic sources
primary sources). 4 - Tape(s) and acoustical sources
The PS (or source) code is entered in a space, the extreme left of which is 5 - "Live" electronic sources and acoustical sources
placed in a location corresponding to the beginning of the sound. A direct line 6 - Tapc(s), "live" electronic sources and acoustical sources.
indicates the duration of the PS on the track (even if mixing brings the system
back la silence before the cnd).
Immediately underneath, one finds indications for panning and if neces- CHART 7 THE TERHARV SVSTEN
sary, the other processors, which could not have been used directly on the PS.
Finally, one finds the dynamic profile proper to the material of this track. ELENEHTS DEFINITION SE! tDNTEIIT
The levels are specified on the vertical axis and the composer should indicate
what degree of precision is required (the levels could merely indicate an ENITT/IIG ELENENT OF THE svsm SECONDARY SYSTEMS
intention of relative intensity and the performer should modify the levels to SOURCE OF ANY INDEX
take into account the masking effects due to the juxtaposition of individual SET ILI~[ AIID/OR RECORDED!.
intensities on tracks).
Time, marked by short dashes above the first track, is only indicated by
numbers when an event begins or ends. The mixing score can be divided in LAST TRANSMISSION LINK - mUt6
ENISSION
section: time indications might follow the preceding section or sturt again at or TItE PIHE TO
- AMPLIFICATION
point zero. DEVICE THE LISTENER
- TRANSDUCTION
30 LQUISE GARJEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECTRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 31

2. Number of lracks and number of speakers (x X y)

x: number of independent tracks after any kind of live mixing)
y: number of speakers through which each track is emined.
-.. Q/IIl I .1
_.
Q.UllFlt.llltJ - tuu.

... ,.......
Example:
TS-03-3X2
•, [lJIHl]I[ WtU
pUlelle , .,
la ... I• Tt " I • .., Tt muusm
IUllSfDWllllll If ICTIlIlI!l Ill[ UUWlt, WIg
,,,,i<l...
TS: Ternary system
03: Third type: consists of tapes and electronic source(s) ..
~'ID
it-ll
,
••• IlQIUl
..11. "j"
j ... l""'ot ...
""ltl·luo<ll.. " .... It ...

1.",,101'
f~'la
I~·ll
U·ll
JA·lJ
1I-11
L..·,,,.llll...
HI ...·'U1 IlIt...
1.1IlI·,.u 11Ih..
"W Hit"
ir.,OI< .q•• Il",

...,..
,.,
~'!I PI.t "I" ,.""1.. P."..I.. I, .,"11"..
3 X 2: 3 independent tracks, each emitted by two speakers (thus 6 11-11 loll ••••1.. 1'''''1''
11- "
IlMSFMMIHllI IT M:1ID11 01 THE wtIlUIIE
speakers in all). w.n f!\!! JEucOMltNlQIIDn
More complex systems arc to be found. As for example, two channels being
sent to one loudspeaker each, and two others sent to two loudspeakers each:
...."
...
IHI
!Ht
ltJol. , . . . ~t<I .. I"' ...
1"1 •
1.I.. hl ..
41.~

,..
lll-ll
...n
\Iolt"!. ' .. 1.... 11 •• uOllli ...
t..,,,,,or
hI·.....
~1'M::"ln •
,......." I.
lol.I.IIl'
,...,. UlIllli ...
(2 X I) + (2 X 2). k sm.ms
, .,
ICMIIt-'l "'ltl'l' UlIlili ...

... IUlI5ftlllollJClll M:IU~ CIlIlf:'f.U:on I

It-I' _ .. f .......1..1 l..ltv.uU, ,....
"'H 10 • _""t. . . .Ii... l ..,
C. GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION: THE TERNARY SCORE. s...h .....". ":f:'H t ... ,ul,.. ....
!I·m
,n·ll
1.11",1 ... 11,<1 ..... 00<11 ..1

I
~l .. t .. ",1I<'J _lit..

.
_UI" .......... li,,1I1 f...~...'1 llI/t...
(Example 7).
k·. IIIaaIO " .... tcl . _ . 1..lu, H TUlI5fMMIlCl If M:II. III 11( rMS£
Since type 6 system corresponds 10 the most diversified combination, this is the ~
...11 •• i ....1....1
~ll .t~ ........ It-.a IIKI..........Ii..1 ' ...." ... 1..
one we will refer 10 in the following paragraphs. The score for a less complex 11·11 1"Ud .....ril.. ot...
111-11 "'dO; .~... oIIUI...
fl.-13 litHoI I."r
system follows the same principles.
,..
fl'll 1..... 1....., Ilh,
The ternary score consists of two parts corresponding 10 the two elements: fUIISFORIItll1lll IT Km. Illl Ill[ IWflOII
fNO
11·'1 Ir~l;:lltj.:S:~~:1:;.~::;::~j",
1. The sources
The upper part represents the relation between sources. Each source being
identified by an SS code (PSs being written on the secondary score of each TESTING THE SYSTEM: A PEDAGOGICAL EXPERIMENT
musician, they do not have to appear on the ternary score).
Atthe mixing console, the technician-"director" is also identified by an SS We havc seen at the beginning how the idea of this system arose on the
of which the index should be higher by I than that of the highest index of the occasion of research of pedagogical nature, Again it is in this pedagogical
musicians' SSs. context that we have somewhat found our first laboratory. The experiment
The score of an "acoustical" musician will be wriuen with an appropriate allowed the verification of some hypothesis.
systcm, probably accompanied by a reading graph of the electronic scorc. First hypothesis: bccause of the system, the technician-performer can
The codes of the "live" SSs arc written in the squares, the codes of remain totally autonomous in relation to the composer.
previously recorded SSs are written above the tape-recorder symbols. The students, alone or in groups of two, received index-cards to be rea-
lized. If they feltthcy needed it they could consult the class-assistant who in
2, The emission device this case was also one of thc designers of the system, In spite of the fact that
Thc lower part of thc ternary score uscs symbols specific to the emission devlcc they were beginners and in spitc of the fact that generally the cards are not very
and illustrates thc geographical position of the musicians and/or equipmcnt, explicil with rcgards to thc real conncxions to be made betwecn the different
and if necessary of the public. picces of cquipment. we noticed they wcre more independent and better still,
As for the primary and secondary scorcs, verbal instructions specify emis- morc cfficient: in a few hours a week of studio-time, they wcre able to explore,
sion conditions: the intensity, the height of the speakers etc.,. systematically and in depth. a great number of electra-acoustic writing tech-
niques. some of which werc truly difficult to realize.
32 LQUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECfRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 33

Cl~S5!Ht.l1l1M - COltS IC,ol.l

they retained obvious similtude (Example 12 shows an extreme case of
CKARII "
"openness").
CCDE! IlWIlfORlll:!S ItlJ~I.) mES fOUEIS
Third hyporhesis: Familiarization with such a system permits the develop~
!AlIIPI,uflQIIS ment of a form of solfcgc. During a practical test, each student received a
"
le-I 'lIU5lN CQltA£lE" OPEAAJJ~5
"
fl-l
rU~E FO!!I!OS
I.e. OUTPUT raMUS relatively complex PS to be realized. Before patching anything they were
lC-IQ
TC-II
"I' ",or...
1.....1..
FA-IO
11-11
lO"-lnq,.." I'""ot ...
RiO." , •• ",t...- required to "sing" the system. Surprised at this request all of them were
fC-11 10,. loop a-ll 10..1.... ,,,,,.tlll
IC-11 hp, .<1'0 II-U S""".,...
10,1'"
nevertheless able to sing it, after studying the score for a few minutes. This may
IC-I'
lC-IS
nlO'i'j fA-I.
FI-ll
lC·I~
hI' ~.
To,. _,•••
': "i.ll ..
fl-I'
" ••1
1r.lor
at first seem a useless game. However, the system was complicated, the
lC-ll [dllio, II-ll J'r·lick
adjustments fragile; to be able to produce it in a limited amount of time, it had
re-l mMIC PRQFIll'f6 FA-l 'I'IllSIVE OUTPUT fOR~m
to be heard internally; the student had to be somewhat ready to "recognise" it.
rC-10
tC-11
,.Io.tI... h.
,,, ...... p,t .. ti.uht
FI-10
FA-II
'.h. 1","!Il1
!,."I t,III" Onc of the more specific pedagogical goals was to allow each student to
IC-21 fl-ll
TC-l1 ~:1::1" ""Ull loll
express his own aesthetic values. However, it must not be forgotten that this
TC-24 SOOt" 111"1,, "t"tiont" mill.i
lC-3 uCElVm IW5D~US
"
fH I.C. OUIPUT 5[1IS~5
was not a composer's assignment; it was an interpreter's assignment and a very
precise technical approach containing many constraints was imposed. Keeping
11-10 'itch t. ,,It'I' , ...... t"
IC-30 Nl,,,,I.. , Ft-Il Eo"l.,. '.11..., this in mind and considering that several cards were "open" and that con-
IC-ll Coot"t ,;".,h'" rHl ly."IC i.tf,,,I...
IC-32 'Id.....,
f1-1 1.YIl.Sll'E OOlfUl SUSORS straints on the secondary system were minimal, students have produced rather
lH ElIll1JII6 !~AllSDlICUS
fHO S",1o "I ~II. different pieces of work but which reflected individual researches. Among
"-le l ..d"ultr FI-ll ,.1" d,l'l
rt-ll
It-ll
Eldt"
lIUdpb,.,
fNl Sd,,,tl t'jll" other things, we have noticed that many of them had chosen for their '·free
fJ-I~ ,~,to-.l"t,i"t I'll choice" cards, to realize transcriptions of devices invented by more advanced
fHO El"trod. composition students. They had access to these transcriptions through the
above-mentioned reference index.
Wc did not wish either to suppress any discovery made in the course of
Second hypothesis: the system of notation c<ln produce any previously "tinkering-with- the- knobs": the progression action-audition-action is specific
determined sound result. In other words, different performers never having to electra-acoustic music and is truly one of its most fascinating aspects. Once
heard the sound material written as a system-card can produce results very the sound was found and accepted, the student had to analyze and notate all
similar sound-wise to the composer's intent. the device's parameters in such a manner that it could be redone anytime.
Obviously, resemblance is directly proportional to the degree of precision Composers do not always have to yield to this type of constraint but to us, it
in the score: in all the systems where we have looked for such precision, the seemed essential in the learning context of these students.
"reliability" of interpretation was most surprising. However, "interpretation"
does nOl disappear. Individual differences remain and they arc difficult to
measure (apart from reading mistakes, such as those sometimes made in CONCLUSION
traditional scores).
A composer who chooses to consider the share of the interpretation as a What future awaits this proposition for a system of notation? It is hard to
distortion of his intent will probably prefer to realize his piece himself in all its predict with certainty. Many have written about the necessity of a standardized
details - it is the privilege of the electra-acoustic composer. But in many cases, system but the absence of such a system has never slowed musical production
we were forced to admit that the interpretation was even "better" than our down. Originating from a pedagogical context, it is probable that this is indeed
own. the context in which it will be most easily adopted. However, we intend to try to
If the card was "open", that is, if it left a choice of certain parameters to the work closely with composers who would be willing to do so. With them, we
interpreter, results were sometimes very different but still, most of the time, could verify on <J wider scale whether our goal of flexibility and hadaptability"
34 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARJE
10 different situations or new techniques has really been rcached.
We believe several composers will adopt the system, although 10 different
degrees. For some, it will serve the purpose of a short-term mnemonic aid;
studio-lime is precious. For others, it will be useful for discussing or explaining
an original device used in a piece. Obviously, for a composer who has no desire
to communicate with an interpreter and who prefers to produce the work on a
audio tape, writing a complete and detailed score might seem fastidious. BUI
upon examination of some scores, such as "Te/emusik" or·' Essay", it appears
that for some, the performance score is really important even if it was written
after its realization and even if the piece is not really meant to be produced by
anybody else.
For other composers, the idea itself of a device is a musical starting point.
Between his original project and the final version, the composer might want to
preserve a wriuen trace of the evolution of his systelll. Wc have ohcn rcpeated
how this aspect was one of the most fascinating in electra-acoustic music- that
is, the aspect of the interaction between the initial intention and its implica-
tions and the manners in which they were worked out in the studio,
Finally, musicology is onc of the fields in which a normalized system would
be the most appreciated. It is probably not by choice that most musicologists
have worked mainly on listening scores. Let us quote J, J. Nattiez (1976) who,
speaking of semiological research applied to e1ectro-acoustic music, rccognises
that"the esthesic, that is, perceptive explanation will only be poS5ible if we are
in possession ofa matcrial description of the piece, thal is, ils neutral analysis."'
(p. 103)
[n the same way. Rudolph Frisius (1978) demonstrates very well how a
listening score, even though very precise, does not really do justice to a whole
scries of structural informations, some of which are analogous to those of
traditional music or those of cOnlemporary instrumental music (voice pro-
gression, eounlerpoint, clusters, etc.... ) and others, specific of the type of
music. "Wc need notation symbols, not only to represent a synthesis of sound
complexes which come fram relalively simple sound materials. It is just as
significant to observe that with a complex basic material, important parts were
retained; in other words, that the analysis can also be the first step in composi-
tion" (Frisius, 1978, p. I L4).
It is clear that these two dimensions (synthesis and analysis) arc absent
from a listening score,
Thus. it seems highly desirable that the teaching of electra-acoustic writing
techniques should become accessible outside the exclusive composition con-
text. It appears quite certain that musicians will be amenable to the idea of
A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECfRO·ACOUSTlC MUSIC 35
making the effort to learn the vocabulary, assimilate the production tech-
niques, and thus understand better the "specific thought" of the electro~
acoustic composer. They will then be able to transcribe musical works, either
from already existing scores or with Ihe collaboration of the composers, and
doing so, help eleclro-acoustic music emerge fram the "ghetto" where it seems
to have been confined since its very beginning.
NOTES
1. Thcse elemcnts and especially the neologism "former" (formeur) were borrowed
from B. Durr (1978).
2, In his analysis of Tumitlus by Kocnig, Frisius (1978) makes a distinction between
transformations and synchroniutions. This distinction was, however, impossible to
maintain, given the logic of our system. Even a linear addition can only be a
transformation.
3. Wc ha"c not used codes to £iesignate the elements and thc systems only in order to
appear "scientific", Letters and numbcrs correspond to parts and elcments of
clcctro-acoustic works (for example Frisius' analysis of Terminus (1978)) as in the
anaLysis of classical pieces (for example, A-B-A form). We have no vocabulary
similar to that of classical music: movements, themes, coda. A neutral code is more
apt to be unanimously accepted since technical gestures rather than formal struc-
tures are the object of our notation system.
4. The question of symbols is important and was the subject of much reflexion. We
were not Irying to inno"atei on Ihe contrary, the more familiar the symbols, the
beller chance there was that the notation would be understood and accepted by
composers. But there existed no unity among symbols already in use, in relation to
the physical reality represented:
- some, inspired by the notation used for electronic circuits, clearly referred to the
moill e1eclrOl1h- componel/l, (For example. a triangle (in reference to the transis-
tor) for the amplifier).
- others were inspired by theulefllal sllopeofthe device (for example, the speaker)
- still others s)'mbolized the action uf llle device on the signal (for example the
Irapeze for the envelope generalor).
Should we have chosen only one of these possibilities?
Furthcrmore, should we have climinated the lellers identifying modules and equip-
ment? In our opinion, the notation proposed at the Gand conference made excessive
use of them. And all the lctters were taken from the English names of the equip-
ment. It seemed advisable to reduee Ihis praclice to a minimum, To avoid mul·
tipl)'ing symbols, we have sometimes retained the use of lellers inside some of the
symbols (for example for noise generators, or complementary devices such as the
compressor and the ellipander, or for comparable devices, such as Ihe envelope
follower and the integrator.
We believe composers should choose lellers corresponding to the names of the
equipment in the same language as that used for verbal instructions.
36 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE
The biggest problem consisted in finding proper symbols for all devices. 11 seemed
impossible not to forget some; there was the risk of introducing uscle.ss symbols for
rare or obsolete devices but mostly we could not predict the arrival on the market
even in the short-term of new pieces of equipment.
Thus it appeared essential to cstablish the fabrication mh' of the symbols. This rule
was based on the functions proper of the pieces of equipment. The number of
physical parameters of sound is limited. It was possible to identify a few large
categories to which all devices could be related.
Once this rule was established, forms were chosen accoruing to three criteria:
they should resemble forms often used by composers
they should evoke their action subjectively
thcy should be easy to draw by hand (lhis is why wc have replaced the cirde, often
used for generators, by a blason) or with the aid of a template.
5. This follows the proposition of the Gand Conference. However, we must say that for
many processors recently arrived on the market, separation of their constituent
parts is difficult. if not impossible; for others, it is a matter of efficiency; for this
reason, exceptions to the rule will have to be tolerated.
6. This notion of index is suggested by Frisius (1978) who speaks of infcrior, equal or
superior order (Ordnung). (p. 108)
7. We can see that the card-score represents what has oftcn been called "inslrumenl"
by the composers (Sabbe, 1975; Durr, 1976). We have avoided the use of lhis lerm
because it would more or less constitulc an interference in the musical conception of
lhe composer. The word "system" seems at once more neutral and more ap-
propriate to the kind of analysis thal has 10 be done in order to establish the
arrangement of the symbols on the card.
8. Contrary to the Gand conference proposition, wc have chosen a top-to-bottom flow
(or the PS; analogy with computer-technology algorithms did nol appear disturbing;
on Ihe contrary; we wished to retain Ihe horizontal axis and a left-to-right orienta-
lion for the time dimension, sometimes (ound at the bonom o( the primary score.
9. Almost all e1cctra-acoustic concerts require, as part o( the technical device, the use
of at least onc mixing console, their output being connected to the amplification
system (amplifiers and speakers). The action of the technician-"direclor" must be
scen as a secondary system, even if it is kept to a minimum in the case where a tape is
its only source). Thus theoretically, Ihe outputs of this final (and always live) SS are
the real sources of the ternary system. However, when establishing a classification of
the ternary·systems Iypes thal should reflecl the traditions and the realities o(
electra-acoustic concerts, it seemed impossible not to consider the sources of Ihis
final SS as the actual sources of the TS.
RESUME
La musique tlectra-acoustique est apparue au moment ou la nOlion meme de partition
musicale etait I'objet de nombreux debats. EIIe mCffie suscita differentcs formes de
partitionselaborees "ad hoc". Les auteurs proposent un systcme de notation dcstine a
la production des partitions de realisation.
A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECTRO-ACOUSTlC MUSIC 37
Les principales caracteristiques en sont:
"'- (1) qu'il repose sur une analyse approfondie du "geste technique",
(2) que chaque symbole est issu de regles qui penneltc:nt la creation de nouveaux
symboles faciles a integrer au systeme,
(3) que la disposition des symbolcs sur la partition facilite la "lecture a vue" en mettant
en evidence le role propre de chaque appareil du dispositif et le nux du signal audio.
Quoiqu'entreprise dam un contexte pedagogique, ceUe recherche a donne naissan-
.. ce a un oulil qui pourra ctre utile tant aux musicologucs qu'aux compositeurs.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors wish to thank the University of Montreal for its financial support to this
research.
We also thank the many students who helped our experimentation by their active
and patient participation and by their positive criticism.
Finally we thank composer Francis Dhomont for his sustained interest and helpful
comments since Ihe very beginning of this project.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPLETON, D. H., Developmemafld Practice ofEleclfonic Music. Prenlice·Hall, Inc.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1975.
BEHRMAN, D., Wave traill. In: Source, Music of the avant-garde, Vol. 2, no. 1.
Copyright Compo~r/PerformerEdition, Davis, California, 1968.
DESJARDINS4MELANCON, )., Etude critique de la graphie musicale colltempo-
raim.·. Universitc de Montreal, These de maitrise, dec. 1977.
DURR, Bernard. Le symhitileur. In: cahicrs rechercbe/musique. GRM-INA: Syn-
theliseurslordinateurs. Institul national de I'Audiovisuel, 1976, pp. 11.28.
FENNELLY, B. L., A descriptive notation lor electronic music. A dissertation. Pre-
sented to the Faculty of Yale University in Candidacy for the Degree ofDOCIor
of Philosophy. 1969.
FENNELLY, B. L., Descriptive lal/guage for electronic music. In: Perspective on
Notation and Performance. Ediled by Benjamin Borelz and Edward T. Cone,
1972, N.V. pp. 117·133.
FRISIUS. R., Zum NOIaliolls-probfem in der elektrOllischen Musik. Notation als Sym-
bolisiefllllg van Klu!1gverwQ/ldtschalul/. Interface vol. 7, no. 2·3 (1978), pp.
95-116.
HOLTZMAN, S. R.. Music as Syslcm. Interface vol. 7. no. 4 (1978) pp. 173-187.
HOWE. J. R., H. S., Electronic Music Symhesis, W. W. Norton & Company ine., N.Y.,
1975.
KARKOSCHKA, E.• Ei"e Horpartit/lr dektrollischer Mllsik. Melos, Vol. 38, no. 11,
novo 1971, pp. 468·475.
KARKOSCHKA, E., No/atiOIl in New Music, Ed., by Praeger, N.Y., translated from
German by Ruth Koenig, 1972, pp. 164·174.
38 lOUISE GAR1EPY and JEAN DECARIE
KEANE, D.,Soml! Aspec/$ ofthe Teaching of Electro"ic MIUic Composition. Interface,
vol. 8, no. 1 (1979), pp. \-9.
KOENIG, M. G., Essay. Universal Edilion, 1960.
MACHE, F. B., LA popUflSscrie musical/!. In: Musiquc en Jeu +33. Edition du Seuil,
novcmber 1978, pp. 35-37.
MIEREANU, C, Vile musiqueelecrrQ/Jiquc el sa parr/rioll: Aniclllation de G. Ligeti. In:
Musique en jell *15, Edition du Seuil, september 1974, pp. 102-109.
MUMMA. G"All'ill Lllcier's MusicforSolo Performer 1965. In: Source. VoL 1. no. 2,
July 1967, Composer/Performer Edition, Californill.
NATTIEZ, J .-J., Le SlOW! sbniologiquc de l'objct sOllore. In: cahicrs rcchcrchc/musj·
que INA GRM: 2. le lraile dcsobjcts musicaux 10 ans aprts. Inslilul National
de l'Audiovisuel, 1976.
PARENT, N., Le synthelisellr: terminologie tleologique I t'lll. Ncologie en marehe no.
19 el no. 20, Ed. Officiel du Quebec. O.L.F., Montreal, 1980.
PATACHICH, I., Eitle nt'ue Nolation eleklronischer Mwik. Melos Nz. Vol. 4, no. I,
jan.-fcb.1978, pp. ID-Il1.
REICH, S., Reed Phase. In: Source, Music of the avant-garde, vol. 2, no. I, Copyright
Composer/Performer Edition, Davis. California, 1968.
SABBE. H., STONE, K., WARFIELD, G. Editors.lmematiolltl1 C(m{cre/ICeOI/ Ne ...
Musical No/Utioll. Reporl, Interface vol. 4, no. I (1975) pp. 1-120.
SEEGER, C, Prescriptive and Descriprjve Music-Writing. Musical Ouarterly, vol, 44,
no. 2 (1958) pp. 184-195.
STQCKHAUSEN, K. H., ElcktrOl/iscl!1! 5rudie 11, Universal Edition, 1956.
STQCKHAUSEN, K. H., TclemrlSik UE 14807, Universal Edition 1969.
STRANGE, A.. Elt'ctrol/ic music: sysrellls, techlliques and COll/rv/s, W. C. Brown Co.,
Iowa, 1972.
DHOMONT, F., llilleraireacousmatique. Guest-lecturer at the Faeuhy of Music of Ihe
University of Montreal, on Dec. 9th 1980.
TRANSCRIPTIONS
APPLETON, JOIl H.. PERERA, R. C. (1975). Chap. 4: The Voltage-Controlled
synthesizer, p. 165. fig. 23.
STOCKHAUSEN, K. H. Telelll/l5ik (1969) Section 3, p. 3 and 4.
LEEDY, Douglas. E/IlfOpical Paradise (for Buehla Synlhesizer). In Strange (1972)
p. 138 and 142.
SABBE, H. et al. (1975) "Instrument" Patch sample pp. 118-119.
KOENIG, M. G" Essay. Univcrs'll Edition, 1960.
A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECTRO-ACOUSTlC MUSIC 39
APPENDIX 1
EXAMPLES LIST
Example lA: KOENIG, M. G., Essay, (1960).
Example IB: KOENIG, M. G., Essay, PS-OI-DI. 1-2-3-4-5-7-8. PS-OI·OI'*'6, PS-
02-0H!' l. Transcription: Material A, section \.
'*'
Example I C: KOENIG, M.G., Essay, PS-02-01 J to 7. Transcription: transfor-
mations of material A.
Example 2A: APPLETON, J. H., PERRERA, R. c., (1975), Chap. 4: the Voltage
Controlled Synthesizer, p. 165, fig. 23.
Example 28: APPLETON, J. H., PS-01-02. I, transcription of 7A.
Example 3 : SABBE, H. PS-OI-OS.3, Iranscriplion of SABBE. H. cl al. (1975).
"Instrument" Patch Sample. p. 118-119.
Example 4A: LEEDY, D., Et/tropical Paradise in STRANGE (1972), p. 138-142.
Example 4B: LEEDY, D., PS-OI-OS.!. Transcription of 4A.
Example 4C: LEEDY, D., PS-OI-OS •. Transcription of 4A.
Example SA: STOCKHAUSEN, K. H.• Tdemusik, (1969), Section 3, p. 4.
Example 58: STOCKHAUSEN, K. H .• PS-OI-01+1-2-3-4. Transcription of 5A.
Example SC: STOCKHAUSEN, K. H., PS-OI-03*S. Transcriplion of SA.
Example 6A: STOCKHAUSEN, K. H. Tclemusik, (1969). Section 3, p. 4.
Example 6B: STOCKHAUSEN, K. H., 55-01-11*3.
Example 6C: STOCKHAUSEN, K. H., Telemusik, (1969). Perceptive transcription.
Section 3.
Text to example 6C. A few years ago, Marcelle Deschenes, professor of
e1ectro-aeoustic composition at the Music Faculty of the University of
Montreal, had her students make a descriptive score ofTelemusik. None
of them had seen Stockhausen's score. This example is Ihe transcription
of section 3, made by Jean Decarie. Note the visual element marked by
an arrow (the arrow was added by us:):
at time 21 seconds, the composer's score shows synchrone attacks, but
the recording lacks precision and thc tracks are not synchronc: it is
intcresting to sec thal all Iranscriptions made by the sludents show a
musical perception notatedasan "arpeggio" or an·'appogialura..... how
many composcrscould maintain nevcr to have changed a smallleehnical
problem into a musically morc of less useful clement! In this case, the
performance scorc was not changed to match the tape, and recent
technology night allow a more precise execution of this part.
Example 7 GARIEPY, L" Tcrnary score.
40 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECfRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 41

... IUTtllU.L .. ." IlATEIIUL .. MATClUL ..

u.
......
~ ..... U'n,,, JI~.l ••. To"1 1.0,'b: 3a".1 en, n!lIpd"'·" ....,
,.to
rollu", I. 1 s •• <I ...., Olo'ol." 1 .. cU,."
,,-
• 1~ n./opo

.. .'..
.-
'1.0 n
11.' • &400

..
U.I
I• MO

•••
'
.........,
n.'I.. ,•• ,., .'
... .. ,,-
...

-
M ••
IH.2
1....".1.'•••• :

.. ..... ,
Jo~. hUl .......iH I £/ . . . 1_

("1) 11' 1.1 c•

••••••
~.<.
••1•• "
ncU i • • • • 10;',
....
.'..
/.
'.1'/..
(11)

~......" "Ill (1)

..',
lOG
..."
, ..
I&G
~ n.' I"'"
'.'
.••••••, ..,..... "
Il.l •• nhl~.,
n...lthundo I...... ,
• u I"
Mu,JUu lonC'b.,

-=--- I.
I.
".2 c.
J~'.l

.. l~.O

.•••
1.', On
I.
'.
So
t.
:HI1 ••0
112.'
".1

....._z
U",D
u/•• T. Ttt.'
: .1
,
•••
-'d-
U
:.0

11 •• c.
no,"..r•••o,
s ,

..
rll ..., .. . . ,
... FII<.d . . "

:!!!!!. ••/ •••

(D) hi j . . . . 10110. . . . .,1.1.

h. ,w., 010'bUO;""'" •• _
,~) h ....... ~r... j •• ~
,I .. r.ll to o~' ...... f
h.~••• _

U.
.~,

...
iii

..,
IT ••••••••• JI. l.fol~.~ •• ,~ "r.._ul ••. T1.. «_ • •••• 11 ••( • .,
~.·.'hu<I... ,
••n p.nlhl •• tlo~rn~.. ...... "r ;.• ,011.1 .. "~. ._ .'_1
".(~. .hl he ::, . . . Ir,._ 'n.r .i.::I. re..... ,I ..
"•••, n' ,••" n"..
u"., (•. 11:.1).
p ,._ . . . .",.0 • ,,,4 )'
(... "'.I). ..0-' ••M d. V. . . . ll . . . ,,, . . . . . , . . . . . . eh""."
(_ .. ' ~li.h OK 5 •• 1.~)
(T) ~ ...."d t~ ,\I".~.("." 'H (T) ',"11. "oo '""",'01 ~/: i.
('"l.ll • • t <b. nO)
1.1'''!1~"" ,J .. 1,,,,,'.\1 .... i, c tor " .•
~/,
I.e h
,••••,.... '.d
l, ••• ~.. "._
t" ._,n ,M"
....... 12/". "!In. '~".
l
ll•• (It) b. ' .. b"lo
.,., .11. ,
' ••• 4..
110 •• f
(I') f u , .., ..
.1\ I ,. <••
U .... f I""., I ;:,.ul_
~.", ••• "
~/"
4/~
'.:1. ':'"
... 3/:
~:'"
~"
,. '. h • 4 .. ~. . u. M 1. . h _l
( __, ' 10
Ut).
.,.h) ." (,,,"1 • 43 :1.
U/". ,,/10. 'Oft••/_. ,~, •• ~.'~i 1 .~ _
"'T. :/'. 1/1. 1/-.. 4/~
.... 3/1 C. . . . " . . .h •• h .
'h•• !
Iou). 1~. ,
.In,. I • ;,,"10
".1 1'1
<0_ ho) 01. Q_<I . . h • • • e , ..._ (:10) to, <..... fo. oh
,.. . ,U. . . . . 1.:.<0'1011 •• " U ••• of <110. . . .
10.....11 1/: ,",H. , • .:. . • .., oIud I . " .
,.i".' """_ .. II.C•• kol . . . . . .1_
''''.10 101 , 10. "'"
.....
~.not.. ~lU . . . . . . ~Iol_

~I.
,. ",Ii••.,
••.b, ...
- 'or folr.'
'.1 ... 1.". . . 1.< •• 1
.... 11 .Il
h t Vdlo
.......U.
-C: ., •• 1••
' ••• " ~o!~ . .
"p ,: <110.,
• .. 110 •• too •••• d • • r
• •• ,1 ........
42 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECm.O-ACQUSTtC MUSIC 43

Ex 1SflS·OI·Olrfj.l,,3·'t-S"·'1·8 'I'S·01·01 '6 EX1C

'Re.f:",O~Hle. f'j,s~~ H~tc:ri"'l fI I '5·0-·0111 '. 7 I
SUI ..... "'1
...... rI.l A:

"')r~'"
~I
-, .p. "(") "( 1~""
w.". w. N. ii2~' I"" '.OUI'. ".,.. !.ll!.l
I
1 ..... lo.... t;"",

.1
~:5
is'
11 HI ,,,.
~ ..
.~ ~f1' tU
.S' HI 1"11
'O!l
51'
-
"'/ ',I ,~ ',I
~ ~ I"'T") \;} 'PS·O;·DI ., :
x
1<.
0J S1.', "l.: ltoo

V
~l S.l'l1 il,',
.8 tz.'J. U:1
I'" I "'~ I -... .k'{: S-lfOl)
* : '00

'"
... 5":
,.(;,: JOoo I
0_0 0_0 , . : 1800

< ~
IPs-bl-OI/I'A-:~+)'1'8 PS 01·01'1 IfS.DI.OI _,HPS.O".OI ..,1 8 PS:·O~OI .. 1 ;
02. : ," ,
11'5.01.01'J I - --
l"y(,~1
'r
•
.j, $:
•
,Y. '/a
>-
,,, 8'I,
-:; .,.
~ {,:

.'.
'I<
~!. IIU
iI : fS·c)I·ol "
C ,
D' -
..- .",
,;
18,~1';1
~ (2)
f
-
" , -- ""., (
, ')
G
, - 'B R

P>O;.OI ~,.)..'}'. "'1 p.s'O'l.OI~1~71.1

H.·'" R"&AllI fM.:
(
55·0\-' ~l I 1l1l101\Cf" ,It,:
11"5-01-01 tl'1 f'S.O~·OI '11
11,5 1,,+ 1,,1 1,1 11,'" 11. , I • I.~ I tlfl.
'" IH( O~IGIN"," SWill[ GIll:} tl(llllS .l&0lII TII( fltTERlN' tl(VIQ 1)';[0 8T IIf( COIt'M(I.
TH( 1.I(NI IS THlT "IH( lI(SIAT Ctw_U(S (l;lV Of \/HAT U(S BUll[(. TH(S( frIQIUU
[!lIlTS; (V(n-INING (LS[ IS SII"rISS[O· ,. 60.

'"'"
~LT IH( PS·O'·OI·] ANO.7 M( S(NT TNIlll'J(',H lH( RE'IUB(AATlOO [('lEE.

I A 1B I c DIE I f I '" H I 1N( \'lPllIJOll. Of lH( IIl[VU8(AAIION ANO TH( lUtKSlTl CUIll'l:S tHCRIB[O I. TH[
O~IGI"l.l HO,,! AA( NOUl{O IN l SttONlllllV HsnN.
44 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECTRa-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 45

EX.2A
EX.2B

~,. ."1.1:0-.• lo_~ . • n~ 01 .

... ...,,,1_, ."" f'..,t'u •
FIG. Zl •• 16\
10<1',,"," ,.~.. 1<.

I"CKl f---

or
V
n'::;~. Le:.-
; ";; '~B
<'.;" ", Il'

;'0.-'
~
dol
'" .. ,':!"
'·C(I~o.!·
'''·,I'C... D
C;~l;l":C'

(,0. •• >0...
·.-cU~G!
G!·.!'~:=:
~"'···'l:·
~~.>--.:<:)
J ~
'·'Cl'':'''!- .C';"",_
~r,r===j--?====-=-~'
!":!L~
.f:U':",P :"":,,,,,,,1) t::"·=O:;l.'
....._'.",(, ".' ;-
Ci:la",,;'
~t·ll: ~:(,
$;.1); ".'Y.:L'P".t iT (';O;>l',.

100 H. Applcton. Ronald C. Pcrcra, THE DEVELOPMENT AND PRACTICE OF

ELECfRONIC MUSIC. c.1975, p. 165. Rcprinlcd by permission of Prcnticc-Hall,
Inc., Englewood Oirrs. New Jersey.
46 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECTRQ-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 47
;

EX,3 ,
:I
:'
:I
: '

:I
~.f. SP·R-DS !i
SAIlS" ~. lo\"'.<t
, :',
__.---u:; umu_:.
, ." I 19/5
l~ .'

_~,'-,rm_---_~
,,-0 0

,.UUn ' I

"'"/---+--.==0;----1
_________ u J '_,
,,
,
,
i
,

,--- --- ---- -~-- - _.'

,
0n , •
I

nn__ ,
u~,,,,,,,:
'

·m
Ill, ~"[ "[CL;:.'" :1OO'Jl~TJCJ:I Of ~"E Cl'Xr i,
;':'0 ilElO-" S ~,.

,
I

..•
141
48 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECTRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 49

EX.4B E1..4C

$OIJltU A10
IANlSfOIll'lR

""

.01 Z

r~_l r"..u.. t
C
•, •, • •• •• •• • •
•• ••
\
50 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECfRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 51

;i" EX.58

li
~:
Ii
•
!, ,
;
, i i
o J,
,,
,
,
,-
SH~T ;Rl'aUE~C1U

! ,
; 0'0 1 01< l
""
,.,
~ i
PS-DJ·Ollt
,, ,~,

,,~
)l~O
'1688
,,~

11300 118'l(l ,,~

• 11610 119,0 ,,~

,i POT. I IoIIP 1 AI THE 'iAl'( UVH

": AAJUST POT. , l~ SUOi IWmtR T1<AI

01FHR(NTlAl T\:NE, '/-f,
~o fJof,
.~ HAVE THE 1"11: L()urnE S

•
,,
1 ,l 5-01_ n')
~,
,. j
,
j, l ~ ~HORO Jl SEC. A'; fCHOW,
'1 6'l1lO
~ , <
, o 10 II SH, STAJ!T fREQuENCl[S :/ IOWO
<
, , /1: n~tpT flU Of THt FREQlUCY Of OSCIllATOR I TO; ) 11100

1 ,!
!
- < Ib- ,
·E /1.1 TO Jl,
• 111&0
SLIGHT DiIoNGtS Of THt fREOI.UCY OF O>ClllATOR 1

hJ ~. ~,
,,t , rt ,
! ~ ,1
1"'1 ®
~
~ :
« ~

"1
><
w
52 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECfRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 53

EX.5e

IIH' I'S-II-(I
srOO:KoIl/SEI
M"

I•

I'S.QI_Ol-S ' : OlIlM Of;ll'l I: )0 ~t.

o! ,
<

p!>_Ol.O).oSl; WfM Of IIIIl WITIIIII: flIUlIoIllIIG Im......1( I'IlOfIU:

Illll'l'iO III
OS(. 1 f l ( Q . : - - - - - - - - '

_--.....JDL.._ _ I:t:=:=:ji--o-.:::::,."...

• , , ,
If! ~' !it 0
m ,
'" ."
.n @ G •
• ca
•

~Ia
x
H 0==, 1=1 1"'=' 1>1
w
54 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECfRQ-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 55

~ n~'
&-~

. .
l'd 1\ ,
I
/'
~
•
··
I1 !• ·•
, •·
-~-- --

•·
•
•
•
•
•
N
•
o ... •
•
I.V •
• I;
•
• I
• I
~
,
·· ,,I
,
i\ ,,

_-lH' ~ 1
1 1.. I

!
"(: <
,
< •
,, U
1
,
~

( <0
~

'""
9 9 9 0
, •
;; 0 ;; ~ 0

i;.
, ft. .,:i ~
, ea
• '0

,,,
56 lOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE
,
EX.7 APPENDIX 2
DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS OF THE SYMBOLS
AND OF THEIR SPECIFIC PARAMETERS

•...u

,
~UUl(·,r.( I

I'"
, t.:71
1(11[10. TIll: lOl.OlHS or Ht[ IOIlIOlt V{IoKUS IS ""~ ~J ~:![ :(1
.IS 10 ....lAM TlI( ....slUM!>. III(!hE or "~IIf'((IlU('. W4'o(S$~
IS $IJ(;I;(U[Il. _ I lll[ lOl/tllEU or Till: "'l~ $0(0):1''' ~I'N •
*In :tOfU AI !l>E"'l11:11 lE¥'lL fOIl • ~"'l_ lOUOlU;S or Ill' (;I~
IT TH[ ~1l.RlSI SiTtING _OINTS U-I-c·g) 1"'''''IJIVO(IIS .... 01: ""'"
TilE MOll IS ( ... nl.
58 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECfRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 59

"."
P'I'CISICJI 5111US a:II(UTOR
~;"
I f","""" ''''''t....l '..,ut
lA_I

F.llT{~ r SI,ul h.,n

' ..........., COllt ....l Input
._idtll control 1"""1
,--

519... 1 .. utj>,,!

Eo:
1 5191'.1 .... tjlul
51_ .... ll c.. t .... 1 l""uI
f: c:..ftltr Or cut·DU fl"l'q,,"nCJ'
b.... : ',nd "tdtll (t or <><t... rr.~tlOl')
'I: (r-eSO"ioce) "~r f .... 0 to 10'
s: .1"Pl! ( ~a/o<:t ... )
'A t~HI 01
l~ 1>t9Inn'"9 of tr.. 0<0'. ,""o'd .~"" if ".'.....,
,~. t1,. "_ro
,nd t~• • ppr~,j... tl,.

r
e<luh.lenc. . . . h .... n .
f: rr~qoe"'Y (Mt) f,.,,,,"oc, 'UPOl1I! tu .....

f, TA_IO ~:p~S

~
fllT(~ lA-ll ~l~-P~S fiLTER

r,~:
J
L'~' "•
1 '-1
"."
IUTI+RaCTlOl OSClLLATClll "~
'-' 1 !~Ul.e wldtl'l """t .... l
'-'
l .... lZ~..!l.llU l"_llllQTOl flllU

5Y""'l'OfIllnlon outpul \. ",) L

"., .
fr-eq"'''''1 e.... trol input

~ ~ ~ ~
~i'l

tfj""'"'
tput
h:
w.f .. Fl : 'inu, L IB-ll ~_R""HIC rQlMlr/H
Fl: U1,ngll;,r
D: Uwtocth
.
,f,
ri: .... ot.09111 •• ~.[
f5: 'Ulrcn.

" '1odl'",,1
'",""'1><1 IKJ)
I
" ,.t Ion: .... tr.... I g \' m
I •• w_ Ill"" ...n.... ld'b
'''p<>M'

11
_wd 1.1 Tilt f ..q"'''''1 h qt_ I t t ... bott_ qf tile tII ..,

(.,
c<>nu',] rnpoltH:.... lInur
:
for";_ .....
..... l_rlthooic
_f_. specific '''''''11_ ._Id "" cldl_
I, ~1 ,n e.h."nt ... lht ql tile OOI~ut l ... h 0. 117- o ,ropll

• :~:':";:':;:~'f.'J.
h: F.: .1I...,,-t.longlo. ""..-k ..... t.ftt lSl ... ori"", • ¥ I
For F4, tM. POlhl.., ;, ...d tor ~ ",h. "Iclu. It)
,"p"
'-' t,I:1'" '"'I""tItY ............ Is ,I ..n
I t 1101 IlOU_ of tho co.... " ...

I,
'.E. .,"'unl .. 1ht of tM oor_to.
SA-~ .01_ 0. " 0 ,.Opll.
IIOIS( liU[UTOllS
1~t9"01 ""tpu'

!I
SA-lO_WHIH NOISE \7"
SA_21_ PINK NOISE
OUIPut

SA-i2- lnl~ NOlSr

A'H~11

I' •I
,.)
or ,,,,cHic 11000\"

I I
I
I I I I I

? ? Y ':~oto, f""",,,,,,
'l,S:_·Q.o Il;I
1.1 _ ... ~t 1• ..,1 ,. I
 . lit"
- .

60 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF OTATION FOR ELECTRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 61

TA_2O
YOl TAG( C()lTAOLED ""'L1f1ER Signal input TlHJ MINr, mlllJLATOR
D Signal inputs

LIMa .. control
\<,,
Jl'oollnur control
Control i oput

output

Log.rlth.lc control
Si,:"ul output

Tt-2. ~
Signal 1..,ut

1 J J
S1gnd lllflut

~;/ \/7 V \+/

Y I!.
18·25
PQII£A Alf>ll FlE P.
Ne~athe

t
half-w.v" output

Sl,~1
input
POSitive half-w,ye
output

TA·2l CI)IoI>R£SSOR-LlM!TER Slgn.1 input

Signal output
fA·n £lPAiittR-CA'tt
, I,
1
Control input • ,"""st of the t;~. the syotlol
The ••.,r.ge pll\1'er ( in wj ean
"j 11 be used on the tern ....J
~ not.ted beside the sylllbol
Icore .
or
\ at the oottO'/ll of the card.

1A.21
Is'' ' ' TA_!l
outout
,
,
TB-26
YOllAa: Af'PLlFl(R Sign.l input

\Y
l:Th~,hold (., I Th~$hold
1: C"",r6S I on 2 hp.ns;O'l utl0
r.tio J Att.e1 tjrle(~~
J:Atuck tl..,(e) • Ileluse t11111!(J
.:Releu~ tiJne

S'9tIal output

~s7
V
'\t7' J 9; gain ( dB or rollic)
Ex:

f t
 1.

62 LQUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECfRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 63

TB_)}
Z£ITRI;t;lEN (".. ~~•• f",o .. o<y,"Ht.. )
TB-.O
(l[CTRO·ACOOSTICAl R(V[RI![~A1Q'
J SI9".1 loput

,
)
, r.....t><rotion ,,- ",i\lOol output
('<cl

PI". 'o ... b,,.,,,, '>prlng ,,,",~.r.l.r

1 Si~n.l output

,J
( •, ')
j
c: t,,",po,ition lotto' (In , ..,Ho.. , or fund.""'nUl
r ...qwnci .. "llo)
(I " I)
TA-JI
....~AWGUl' ~]IOl S~IFT£R

S19n'1 input input

J 1
T~_.]
SI'1".1 inout
OlGll.~ R[i{RB(I\AIQR.
"nede'1_1,
" O.J.
,,,
" :""
,Rr.1" <I""I"" )

': (,.n,po,ltl"n foctor(;" ,e~;lo"" or fuod.... "l.l

'" .... to
of to.
fo . . . jff~",", f~ ... "<i ..
.''''<0 .. Ih'
~
"'d.
1>ott ...
1 Ii 'l"'1 ""put

r'.q",,",I., rUIO"':,,.,- "-:=7,-__--1 ~".O(>ly of ,,,,Hie >1_10

,,, ~,: J SI !lOO' I,pu,

,
:f,"q.. n,~ (H,)

"""'
('1"1
.. l.y U .... I",)
I"
x-r~ 1)(1 T
TA_l'
,, ·410y ti ... nud,
<01>0 .cHt." °"\1 ""'1 Si9n.l O"\~ut

PlGlTAt. fRl;QIIE:~tr I.IiIFHR

lA-'l AA.LOG "'<.I[ 1.K1f1"{R
TA·'] Qn.rW_PHilli»ULT[rl~lA') SI,!",1 tnpvt

'''''trol input
d:"",.y <I ... (",)
( " P. ~.
J
Si!l".l O'\~ut

!O·4l H·.]

"' tr.o'?o'ili"" foetor li" .. .,itQn~, or f""~."..nu\ J, I

( ,
fr.q""nci., rotioJ
( ~.·.S.
C
0.0.

J I
64 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECfRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 65
"

H·l0
TAPE Il(COIlOCR
T1i-44
!l1V[RTER ,,",L1f1ER
Signal input
0_0
(phyb.c~ output)

( - ,

1 'H--·~·
I'iJ,TITRACK TAPE IUCORD(R
Signal output

h:

LJ,
"
0 __ 0

( -- ')
1
"l.e~ with ;nve~led and
non inverted outputs
1
T8-5 Signal input S COde of U,. source to t..
.OYersed. 0--<-0
T[I'(COfo'l'ItESSOR-E XP AA CE R
r" "
1
Signal output
1 Sl .... illoutput

"
r;COllP~5sion or expinsion ntio
TC-I~ I >
~
1
:-9: ,. "'"
".>0,
°' °
IHfltEGl.£R Code of IN SO<IfU DIGITAL Hit: EQK>A£SSOlt EIPNHl:Il
{lISI'd n tblf be tt"", .:>dified "coclr of the Sautee
cOIIPO"'esso

"np;wder)
J. Slgnll input
-
"I""" duratillll.H MCUSlI'7
(in s or CI01

" 0 1(/£ "I

lSllJf\ll

= ,
1519",1
1 Signal output
output

"

dl HI dII: dhtlnce t.t"",en the phybllck he.d!. (dol: dlst... c.. be~n tile Iln ... 01
tM fint p.b. head) (In toO)
 66 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECTRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 67

1 J 5ign~l(s) input(s) TC- 15

J
,I.
1C-13 TAPE OHAY
TAPE ECHO
·
" tape speed
,
"

,·
, "
"'
Tope reel

nuober of tape recorders used

p
,
1 1
tdpe speed
Signal(s) output(:; )
"d, dinante between the playback "
head of the tape recorder

~
---- \ and the phybH< head .of the
Ex: 2 tracks Ex: 4 tr.cks , following tape recorder

,
rn- - -'"1
· ,,, ,,I
f----l. I. ,

'--

~ 1 ,

1(-14 TC-15 (Cont. I J L

Si gn.l input TAPE DELAY
FlA.~GWG -1

J 1 "
Tape loop. (Bitroocdi~

"
A,
, ,
tape ,peed
"
t(
dl: dinance bet"een playback
, Ex: U

,
head 1 and phyback head 2

" tape speed

I I
A,
d2 distance between playback
head 2 Md playback head 1

1 1 1
l1anipulatioo: Change slightly the speed of one of the tape
recorders by holding the reel fl.nge with the hand.
1

~
,.
.,, , 8
'First descrit>ed ~nd n• ..,d
,
h
linkS 1 .nd 2
by J.~,~rie ~nd ~. a~d~rd .r<! eHenti~l
,
~
 i
,
68 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE
,
,,
A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELEcrRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 69

T(-16 , TC-,O
POTEIIT1OHETER
H-21
PANORAM POTEliT1QrlETER
iC-22
JOYSTI CK
TN'[ SPUO VARIATION
,·
,

J,
-+:""'" ,.,", f·"
Sign.1 input

,, ·
1 nput

&.
0' 0"
1'~'~"
1 ,

., , 5, gn~ 1 output $, gn~ 1 output

outputs
~"!'_t_I!,_,,!,.,,,_,,~.I~tl:"" Y~!"J~~,-HL'!' .
1
, l""er "nd w· , " tr.n,~o,it;M i,
l'" li.,ia of f.ctodln 'e",l_
tone, or fT. " -, i
,,·
the Yori"ti""
(in .uito....
or fr.rotl'" &.
r.tio or <,"/,)
&.
1(-23
PEDAL
1C-24
SOURCE SElECTOR
*I105t of the time the symbol
will be found on secund~ry scores. 00
C9
or <../.) POTENT lOtnrR
,
"l- "0·" 15190.1 ,,
the primary score it is placed right

,,'
"
output wtput

I,,~,' beside the potentiometer symboL i f Its

f'·'h
wud " U.., fun _ input sHting is fixed, or 0t1 ~ gr~ph ~t the
tl"" .. rH ten .t bottorn of the card if the pann1ng (or
the bott"", of the CHd
' nputs ,

I
selectiool has to be changed during the
0 productiM of the PS
H_n
l:DllING
., '00,
", '"~
i
,! "
·
>(, Signal output
Signal
output

" cod. ,,I

,, Tt-XI
MICRoPHONE
TC- 31
COI'lT ACT i'll CROPtlONE
1C-32
PICK-UP
i
1
A-N: (ode. of the ,oure•• (pri ... ry 'oure", or pri ... ry ,ySl.""j
i,
i
,I
I
•
y.,." output

0·" output

T-" '" "'

,
thot "ill be edited togHhH.

A 9r.phic repr...ntoti"" of the .ditlny procedure .. ill !

Ourlti"", ••pres,ed in , or ""'

"' fou"o on ,n" cord. i, lC-40

A"'' '
LOUOSPEAKER
!·
I,, •, '00"'
, .'
, I, TC_41

.,
H-]] (Cont 1C-42
J DClTOR HEAtIP I\OIl E
u: 5(-30'1 ,

~ A
S(-2013
"",
0, SP_Ol_04H
SP-O,-OS!S

, i
~" • '0 '" , ,
C I A I C I

", 10 I 11
" •" • 1 ho I
6
'"
"
·,
Du"tio", .,pr'''ed in elll. ,
,
70 LOUlSE GARIEI'Y and JEAN DECARIE
A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECfRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 71

FA-l0 FA_11
lOll-FREQiXHCY AANCl1H GENER~_TOR
FA_16 FA_ ])
BEHOCR__ ~_OYSTJS!.....

tJ
C""t",1 ,ign.1 outpu

1
fA_l/
EM~ElI)PE GENERATOR

Control input'
FA-20
7·,,°,"'" output

-_. -- ---.
~ Control ,igM]
outpul

C19i.f .J!,_U_l.?_C. .Gf~I!".~J.!l_B)

SynChrOnildli"i
, n~ut
1
Pul,. >lidth control input

'un" tr;~9er input

"ufl" lri 9')e' input .< , frequency control input

.: .ttoo' time (s)

d: deooy ti"", (s) Pul •• outPut
., ,uH.ln It_eT ldll or n'-'">er defined)
c: relu.e U"", (,)

,,1,-13
, freQ ..... ncy (HI)
SrQOCMCER pu!>e width

Ge""ric 'yobol: Trig'l"r

A<urbly of .pecific ,ylOl>o1<:

-
FA-;'l f~_~,

l','.~j_I.1:'J_ .:.!1_G.Y:_'. 1~3J GATE.

,

FA_U
FA_I~

~.,'"' 0
HIBOARO
~O}.!-_

T~~tPut "." .l '"''''""" cp."""''"'

 I;
,
,
72 LQUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE A SYSTEM OF NOTATION FOR ELECTRO-ACOUSTIC MUSIC 73
,

fa-l ~Signal input FB-~l ,B-:2

DC Oii'fPUT SENSORS ~ PUlSE OELAY SCHflJTT TRIGGER
"
( .1

,,
Signal input Signal input
Control ,ignol output
,,I
FB_IO FB- 11 F8-12 ,' ( , ,I \' , di
PI TC~- TO-VDl TAGE
CONVERTER
ENVELOPE FOLLOWER DYNAMIC 1Nl[ ATOR
,, \ P.O. / \ ", /

C
1-
'IV J A 0.1.
,
l,iU
,

• ,
"
rhe de13y-time
fall dehy-time
C""trol signal output

, tnreshold
d, pulse duration
Contral si gOd 1 Olltput

~
4,
F8-20 ~

SAK'lE-ANO-HOLO Signal input fB-30 FB-40

)
, Pf«JTO-HECTRICAL CELL ELECTRODE:

' \ I,e, ! " er input ;

,~
1 Control sIgnal output
, .;,

,
,
>
CD C n
\ S.H. !I 9 ,

,
>
(ootrol signal output Control signal output

f
, ,

,
"

,
74 LOUISE GARIEPY and JEAN DECARIE 11Ilerface. Vol. 13 (1984), pp. 75-106 0303-3902184/1302-0075 S3.00
<OSwets & Zcitlinger
BIOGRAPHIES

louise Gariepy started her musical education in Montreal, Canada. From 1967 to 1971 The Analysis of Musical Meaning
she studied composition, electroniccomposilion and Tontechnik at the Music Academy A Theory and an Experiment
of Vienna, Austria. From 1972 to 1919, she taught musical acoustics and c1cctto.
acoustics at the Faculty of Music of the University of Montreal, where she was also in
charge of the creation of a quite sophisticated electra-acoustic sector. Since 1979, as an J05 Kunst and Henk Van den Bergh
assistant professor, she also carries out research into the acoustics of the bassoon. (I

Multi-media artist, Jean Decarie has studied video art with Serge Tousignant (painter),
musical composition with Serge Garanl and is presently finishing a master degree in
electra-acoustic composition under thc direction of Marcelle Deschencs at l'Universitc
de Montreal.
In 1979, he participated in the creation of "I' Atelier d'E.tpression ct de Recherche
Electro-Acoustiquc" (tbc Electra-Acoustic Worksbop of Expression and Research) at
l'Univcrsite de Montreal.
Already in 1977, involvcd with integrating different musical languages, a per-
formance group is born: B.I.T. (Bilateral Insanity Training).
In tbe same perspective, in 1982 hc crcated an eleclropop-group: IKo ABSTRACf

The preM:nt "rtick cun~tituh':~ the firsl report of iln empiric.,! validation proce-
dua' that ha~ been de~igned to lc~l lhe Kunsl IY78 theory of mu~ic listening.
Louise Garicpy Reviewed arc. on the onc hand. the specifications and cnrichments that have
Assistant Professor I been incorporated into the theory along the way, r<lnging from the morc so-
Faculte de musique
Universite de Montreal, c.P. 6128, Succ. A.
i phi~lieat..:J 1l1~·tath<.:()rdi<.:;t1 rram<.:\\'ork pres<.:nteJ h<..:rc up tu and including a
numh<:r of ··intuitivc·' pral:lieul rules-of-thumb meant to enhance the theory's
Montreal, P.Q., Canada, H3C 317
I, uscfuln.:ss ,IS a fal:t-finding device, and, on the other hand, the returns of the
empiric;ll le"t lh;'l ha" hcen \:llIllh.u;lcd using p,lrt of a Schubert song.

PRELIMINARY NOTE

For reasons only partly clear to us there has been, after the publication in book
form of our themy (Kun"t IlJ7Ha), less public discussion of it in musicological

t
.,
circles thun wc hud ill fir~l cxpcctc<.l. It muy bc thut our modest bit of formal
machinery has kept musicologists at bay. Our only resource then lies in Ihe
force of arguments: in showing Ih<.ll it aClually is doing something worth wile.
Thai wc cndcuvour to do once more, and specifically with respcct to a musical
I content oriented kind ofrcccption research, in the present article. Or, again, it

j may be that musicologisb are just the average lazy lot, and that, as is normal in
scientific communities. thcy arc satisfied with taking their cues from each
other. This cannot really be helped. Wc can only hope to spur one or more of
them into some heightened degree of wakefulness. Unfortunately, there arc no
foolproof recipes for doing Ihat. Finally, it may be that our publisher has been