This may seem oxymoronic, but on occasion I notice that a lot of choral music is just... too musical. What does that even mean, "too musical"? It's hard to define, but here's how I think of it.
A large amount of choral pieces (especially older works) are incredibly similar. Soupy, big chords, slow, secular, common sounds. VOCES8, an incredibly talented choral group that I had the pleasure of seeing last year, has a tendency to fill their sets and albums with these soupy pieces. Eric Whitacre (don't even get me started) has written a LOT of soupy pieces filled to the brim with cluster chords. There's a hefty amount of emphasis on these basic "soupy" pieces in the choral sphere, especially among the work of our most popular composers and performers. I could go on and on. At a certain point, it gets to be a bit boring. Beautiful, yes! But predictable. You can watch a swan swim in a lake for a minute and marvel at the beauty of nature and the majesty of Earth’s creatures, but after an hour of watching it swim, it just becomes a stupid bird. There's only so many beautiful chords you can hear with a lead-up to a high soprano note at fortissimo before you start to say: "Ok, what else can a voice do?"
A lot! The voice can do a lot! As composers, it's our job to utilize everything and anything the voice can do, whether it be pitched or unpitched. I plan to write more on the scope of the voice/singers' potential, but for now I'll focus on a somewhat underutilized compositional "technique" (for lack of a better word) that can help shake up an audience and make your pieces stand out among the crowd.
Cacophony. It's a fun word to say, honestly may be up in my top 5 words (My current #1 is Sacapuntas, which is Spanish for Pencil Sharpener). I could fangirl over cacophony in Choral music forever, but we have to keep this post on-topic to a reasonable extent. There's so many ways to create a cacophonous sound in a Choral piece, and it was incredibly difficult to write an article about cacophony without a way to separate the different ways in which it can be achieved within your music. I promise this blog post was meant to be shorter, but I’ve gone off the deep end now and there’s no turning back.
TYPES OF CACOPHONY (or, Cacophonical Classification)
As far as I can tell, there hasn't really been any effort to "classify" forms of cacophony in music (feel free to correct me if otherwise, I'm really interested in this), so I took it upon myself (for fun) to create 4 Classes of Cacophony. Behold: the list!
Pitched Structured Cacophony
Unpitched Structured Cacophony
Pitched Aleatoric Cacophony
Unpitched Aleatoric Cacophony
Allow me to explain the pile of information I just dumped in front of you (I promise, it’ll be a much more visually appealing diagram soon). Cacophony, at the base definitional level, is defined by Merriam-Webster as “harsh or jarring sound” and “an incongruous or chaotic mixture”. Cacophony in music is essentially impossible to define explicitly with a set of rules, and can be recognized on a more “I’ll know it when I hear it” basis. Regardless, there are a multitude of ways in which a “harsh” and “incongruous” sound can be created in a choral context. Starting with techniques in which these sounds are created: a singer can create sounds with their voice, mouth, and body — these sounds can be either pitched (singing, humming, etc.) or unpitched (speaking, clapping, stomping, etc.). Subsequently, cacophony can be split into these two techniques: Pitched and Unpitched.
Building on this, cacophony can be written/composed in two main forms. I will refer to the first as “Structured” form, in which the exact rhythms and/or pitches of a cacophonous section are notated for the singers to follow along with. This notation, when followed correctly, creates a sort of “controlled chaos”, with a cacophonous sound being created consistently with each performance. As for the second form, I’ve chosen the term “Aleatoric”. Aleatory is a compositional technique/element that relies on randomness/performer determination. As a quick unspecific example, consider a section of a piece in which the composer notates that the singers must speak or sing certain words at random/unspecific rhythms and/or pitches within a selected range/amount of measures in the piece. This is the basis of Aleatory — each performance of the song is inherently different because the singers’ interpretation of an aleatoric section will be different every time. Aleatory (in the sense of sudden randomness) is inherently cacophonous to a degree, as members of a choir are not able to read each other’s minds in the middle of a piece. Consequently, the sound that occurs in an aleatoric section will not be congruent, and is (at a definitional level) cacophony. Thus, the two forms of Cacophony are outlined: Structured and Aleatoric.
These two forms combine with the two techniques of Cacophony to create what I’ll refer to as the “4 Classes of Cacophony”. These classes are best represented in a Punnett Square-esque diagram, in which their overlaps are easiest to interpret. Behold: the diagram!
Now, it’s one thing to make a little chart about these categories, but I doubt that’ll be enough to completely understand the classifications that I’ve designated. For your reading pleasure, let’s get into examples of each classification.
EXAMPLE 1 (PSC): Psalm XCVI by Merrill Bradshaw
If there's one choral composer you need to start looking into, it's Merrill Bradshaw. He was a former BYU Composition Professor and Pianist, and if there was one thing he was good at, it was making NOISE. There's only a few choral pieces of his with recordings out in the wild, and getting a hold of sheet music is a pain and a half (and is the reason why I now have an account with the BYU Library), but here's the ending of one of his most popular Choral pieces, Psalm XCVI, performed by the UU Singers. The whole thing is absolutely amazing, but the ending is what we'll focus on for now.
(Recording by the University of Utah Singers)
What?!? Was that 4 different keys, with each voice part singing triads in their own key at the end? Yeah! A little polymetric (kinda) action at the beginning? Yeah!! I could gush about this song forever, honestly. It's an amazing example of Pitched Structured Cacophony. Bradshaw uses mixed meter, polytonality, and rhythmic variation to create this sort of organized chaos, and it works wonders. When listening to each part individually, you can also hear that they’re (vaguely) easy to follow as a singer! In rehearsal, sections can split up, perfect their individual parts, and unite together to throw their noise everywhere like an infant with a fistful of cheerios. If you pay attention to the Sopranos and Altos, they feed off of each other! Together, they fill every eighth note beat after the first measure of the final cacophonous section, making a sort of hyperactive pitch trampoline in the back. Tenors serve as the "anchor" for the sections, dividing the first few 5/8 measures into 2+3 patterns, before switching to a syncopated vibe as the Altos take "anchor" duty in the 2/4 measures. At the end, the Tenors also serve as the final chord in the section, like a lid finally being thrown onto a grease fire! Basses serve as a sort of groovy "melody" (or the closest thing to it), sticking out in certain sections (like the 3rd measure of the 5/8 section).
Despite sounding like a bunch of random notes, Bradshaw's cacophony is METICULOUSLY planned, with each part serving a distinct role to support each other (or support the sound) through an incredibly hard to follow section. That's the secret to PSC: planning. You can't really stick a bunch of random melodies together and expect it to work out perfectly! A choir is a team, and as composers it's our job to utilize their strengths to facilitate their support of each other and achieve the sound that we want. Properly planning a PSC musical section allows the choir (along with the conductor) to follow along in a sea of noise, helping to ensure that your “crash and burn” section doesn’t ACTUALLY crash and burn. Bradshaw’s choice to use polytonality in the end cacophonous section is not necessarily one you have to make, though. Plenty of dissonance and noise can be made with the pitches in your chosen key. You may also choose to add an accidental or two somewhere in your cacophonous section to create some extra dissonance, the choice is all yours!
Psalm XCVI also shows another thing to consider when writing cacophony: how to limit it. Right after the frantic polymetric section at the start of the excerpt is a nice homophonic section that grounds the listener before sending them off the edge again. Cacophony is best in moderation, and works best at climaxes or endings of a piece. That isn’t to say that cacophonic technique should be saved exclusively for these moments — but that the listener probably doesn’t want to be “in the deep end” for an entire piece. Thanks to this, cacophony ironically relies on homophony for its ultimate “punch” effect — catching the listener off-guard allows for a more engaging musical experience.
EXAMPLE 2 (PAC): Praise the Name of God with a Song by Allen Koepke
I love a short and sweet piece, and Praise the Name… is no exception. We’ll focus on the final page of the piece, which features an excellent example of Pitched Aleatoric Cacophony.
(Recording by the University of Texas at Tyler Patriot Singers)
Singers are instructed to sing the main motif on specified pitches with random tempo and rhythm, with each section starting as prompted by the conductor. Similarly to Bradshaw’s Psalm XCVI, this cacophonic section relies on structure to ensure that the singers remain grounded amongst the chaos. Each section is instructed to repeat the phrase four times, with sections starting one at a time. After each individual singer in a section repeats the motif four times, an entire section should come to the final C# at around the same point, which creates a clearly defined starting point and (somewhat) defined endpoint. This endpoint is more firmly established as all singers/sections reach the final C#, in which the conductor (and ensemble) will be able to hear when all singers have completed their 4 repetitions of the motif, allowing for the ensemble to cleanly move on from the aleatoric section without any “lost” vocalists.
A specific thing to note about aleatoric sections in choral music — there is a fair amount of explaining that must be written out. The instructions for this one measure (or technically 4?) of Praise the Name… end up being a paragraph long, which can easily confuse an ensemble (or a director with a distaste for reading liner notes). Brevity is key in the art of the liner note, and brevity does not quite pair with aleatory well. When utilizing aleatory in your future choral pieces, overthink every word you write to explain the section! Make sure that things are easy to understand without being too dense. Utilizing cacophony in a choral context is not necessarily about letting an ensemble run wild, it’s about setting up the rules for the playground in which the vocalists eat mulch and throw sand at each other.
EXAMPLE 3 (USC): Paean by Merrill Bradshaw
Apologies for another example from Bradshaw, but this seems to be the least used Cacophonic form of the bunch. This was the only example I knew of that fit this description (if you know of more, pop me an email or leave a comment! I’m absolutely interested). Sadly, I don’t have a score of the piece, so you’ll have to use your imagination while listening to this one.
(Recording by the BYU Concert Choir)
This section seems inspired by choral warmups, interestingly enough! Slides and shouts and whines and such. When listening, you can clearly tell there is some rhythmic definition — certain sections are shouting/chanting “Hallelujah” at notated rhythmic patterns. Interestingly, while pitch is clearly not specifically notated, a general “shape” of the pitch seems to be outlined (when sopranos slide high, or when they slide low for instance). Since pitch is (likely) not specifically notated, I felt that this section of Paean earned the title of Unpitched Structured Cacophony.
As I stated previously, there is no specific ruleset for the definition of cacophony — I believe that it will forever exist on only a “know it when I hear it” basis. Small historical fact, the Supreme Court has a precedent for determining “obscenity” in a piece of media on a “Know it when I see it” basis! If it’s good enough for the SCOTUS, it’s good enough for me. I do believe an argument could be made on whether or not this section in Paean serves as a form of cacophony, and if you believe that it should not be classified as such, I am absolutely open to debate on the topic (pop an email or write a comment)! However, there is a notable “incongruent” and “jarring” quality to this section, thanks in part to the mismatched rhythms and yelp-y quality of it all. The mid-20th century was an interesting time for composition, and I would not be surprised if there was a less debatable example of USC, so I will continue searching for pieces that could fall under this category (and I hope you’ll consider doing the same!
EXAMPLE 4 (UAC): Iuppiter by Michael Ostrzyga
This is just a really great atmospheric piece. Lots of interesting choral techniques are used throughout Iuppiter, including whistling! Like I said earlier, the human body and voice can do a lot. That’s for another time, though. Let’s peek into how this piece used Unpitched Aleatoric Cacophony.
(Recording by the University of Oregon Chamber Choir)
I will admit, this is not the most exciting section of the piece. But the random chanting and whispering adds an unparalleled ambience (pronounced the fancy way) to this piece that I can’t get out of my head. Certain portions of the piece encourage “Chanting freely” as opposed to “asynchronous whispering”, the former of which I’ve usually seen interpreted as a sort of pitched chanting, while the latter is interpreted as unpitched. Really, you could consider this as an example of both forms of cacophony! In all honesty, this is another piece laying on the “debatable” line of the cacophonic definition. The incongruence and power of the aleatoric whispering really changes on a choir-to-choir basis — some may opt for a safer, easier to follow approach, while others may opt to overtake any recognizable pitch to add to the chaotic undertone of the section (and provide more of a preview for the section to follow). Regardless, the jarring (and somewhat unsettling) nature of the aleatoric whispering in this section makes me lean toward a more cacophonic classification (and as I mentioned previously, an argument could be made that all aleatory is inherently cacophonic to an extent).
CIRCLING BACK
Wow, that went off the rails a bit, huh? Sorry about the research paper in the middle of my goofy little blog post.
When I originally started this, I just wanted to make a quick little introduction to the idea of chaotic sections in music and encourage you to try it out for yourself! I then seem to have gotten a bit bogged down in the logistics, but this end product just feels like it’s much more beneficial to a composer that is looking to experiment with “chaos” in their work. I really hope I didn’t bore you to death with that graph earlier…
The idea of “cacophony” is daunting for any composer — think of it as a sort of “anti-music”. When all you write is, well… music, then of course the opposite would seem a bit intimidating. By classifying the different forms of this so-called “formless” kind of audio, I hope to open the world of cacophonic technique to you and provide a more organized and easy-to-approach method of thinking when it comes to using cacophony in your music. I hope you enjoyed (at least as much as possible) this academic slog of a silly little blog!
(For contact, email JulianRiosMusic@gmail.com.)
Opmerkingen