Linus Kesson wrote this excellent article deconstructing Arvo Pärt's "Fratres". I hope he will excuse me for borrowing liberally his work, but this is such a great example of mathematical patterns in music, and his illustrations show so well the inherent patterns, that I really can't explain this without using them.
Fratres (the ear-wrenching minute-long violin solo at the beginning notwithstanding) is constructed of 9 "phrases" with a repeating and unchanging "bridge" separating each one. Although each phrase seems quite distinct from the others, it is only a matter of expression: structurally... mathematically they are all equal.
Each phrase is divided into 2 halves. Each half phrase has 3 measures building to a final measure of 8 chords. All chords are of 3 notes each. The first measure is in 7/4 time, and always contains 4 chords: 1 and 2, plus 7 and 8 of the final 8-chord set. The second measure is in 9/4 time, and sticks chords 3 and 6 in the middle to make 6 chords: 1-2-3 and 6-7-8. The third measure is in 11/4 time, and puts in chords 4 and 5, to create the full 1 through 8 chord set. That's the first half of the complete phrase.
For the second half of the phrase, there are 3 more measures in 7/4, 9/4, and 11/4 time. The chords are played backwards... but not as "chords 8 through 1", but instead played mathematically backwards. Keep that in mind.
So playing the 2 halves (the 3 plus 3 measures) as described above makes one of the 9 phrases. (A violin is added as a counterpoint — a narration, I like to say — on top of the phrases, but the mathematical action is always in the chords.)
Now, as mentioned, each of the chords is comprised of 3 notes. The middle note is restricted to the A-minor triad that the piece was written in. The top and the bottom notes work their way through a D-minor scale. (Stay with me on this.)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/23d2d/23d2d8c9010adc73e127f0fcbae8b896cc85e7d7" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a5204/a5204b1397b0463ea682bce332a04a62be56c8ec" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/42e5a/42e5ab8a3fd474338e1844c7363c263901c7b896" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9bdbe/9bdbe8e5174b0fda3ab3535903b4f90bac099ce6" alt=""
Finally, under each phrase, you place a constant left hand "A+E" foundation, and you have the entire piece.
For those of you who can read music, take a look at the first half of the first phrase and the chord pattern as described becomes instantly recognizable:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d5235/d52354f6e0ba7f3fc0c06062cec5aa4ebc914676" alt=""
Remember, the final phrase is in the third measure. The first two are the incomplete phrase being filled.
Now we have established that, indeed, composers can create music based on very strict mathematical progressions. But, let's face it: That's an easy thing to do. I can cook dinner on mathematical progressions. The question is: will it taste any good? I can paint a picture with a mathematical progression of colors. The question is: will it look okay? The question with mathematical music is thus: How does it sound?
Well, if you ask me, I don't think a prettier piece of music has ever been written.
No comments:
Post a Comment