As I begin a new set of collaborations with younger composers in the USA, Sweden and the UK, I have decided to make some of the conversation public: this won’t come in any particular order, and will simply put up the to-and-fro, where an interesting technical or compositional issue is covered. I will just publish the relevant extracts from the E mails.

So here we go.

17th September – Zachary Bell – Composition Student at Peabody Conservatory/Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore 

‘I’m nearly finished with the piece, and wanted to reach out with a question, if you don’t mind. I’ve asked a few violinists about this, but have gotten mixed answers. In several measures of the piece, I’d like a D to be played on the G string and an Eb to be played on the D string a minor-9th higher, while the bow is in the “sul tasto” position. One violinist said that the Eb won’t speak due to the pressure required on the fingerboard combined with the “sul tasto” position. Would you mind confirming that this is able to be played? I’ve attached a picture for reference.’ Zachary Bell to PSS 17 9 24

‘Great question: my fellow-violinists are both right — and wrong!

A question from composer Zachary Bell

How can that be possible. Well, the answer is that sul tasto is a technical instruction which relies on colouristic expectation, rather than a tablature notion of where the bow ‘goes’. I could show you 20 instances of the indication in use, where either the D-string lowering, or the hand being so high on the E -String, means that the bow cant be technically over the fingerboard. But those markings are not wrong – because I know what they/you mean – the delicate, flute-ing, even failing sonority that comes from the marking.  I can hear what is in your mind, and I can make it work! ‘ (PSS to Zachary Bell 17 9 24)

To’s and Fros – conversations across the Atlantic – 24 -25 September

PSS  to Jacob Cuffman

Dear Jacob, /I have been spending some very enjoyable time working on your expressive piece, which works well. I have some questions, and then will follow up your responses, with some suggestions, if that is OK?

1. Tremolo – when I move ‘into’ tremolo – such as bar 4, do you want the onset to be immediate or gradual/shaped?

2. You have been careful to allot a delicate dynamic to the final ‘col legno battuto. I feel that the other places that it is used will have a related delicacy – am I right?

3. When you use ‘tratto’ (which technically needs a qualifier ‘col legno[…] – but in context works, just!), I think you will need a little hair, no?

4. When you move to ‘sul tasto; in line 12 what dynamic do  you mean? In motivically driven material like this, I would suggest that each colour change needs a dynamic or dynamic confirmation – if it is not changing in ()s.

Thanks and looking forward to hearing from you!

Jacob Cuffman  to PSS
I’m completely okay with suggestions!In measure 4, I would like it to be gradual/shaped.

1.     For the ending col legno battuto, there’s an absurd/humoristic element to it, so the idea is that it’s borderline inaudible.

2.     If a little hair is needed, then I’m completely okay with that.

3.     The dynamic in measure 12 is a continuation of measure 11, so P. My apologies if that wasn’t clear.

On the overnight practice desk: fascinating new works from composers at the wonderful Peabody Conservatory
I will be working with them over the next month – and premiering the pieces in Baltimore.
It’s always an inspiring process! 25 9 24

PSS to Zachary Bell  

I spent very good time with ‘Arrival’ yesterday. Just a couple of things for you to think about – the piece works well. 1.  Bars 1, 12 and 2: can you specify a dynamic for the lh pizzicato – think relative to the arco dynamic.

2.  Bars 18-19: can I bring the final ff higher dyad on to the II & I?

Zachary Bell  to PSS

Here are the LH pizzicato dynamic levels: M. 10 – mp/M. 12 – p/M. 22 – pp/

PSS to Zhitao Lin

I have been having a fascinating time beginning work on your intricate piece. I would like to ask some questions, and to point out some things, to begin our pre-event discussions! Here goes:

1. Line 1: I can’t play behind the bridge'(you have misused that indication as ‘one the bridge’, which is wrong – the symbol has a precise meaning), ‘on the bridge’ and sul tasto ‘st’ at the same time !

2. Bar 8: does the circular bowing increase in speed as well as intensity?

3. Bar 11: whilst I understand ‘m.v.b.’ – (molto vibrato), the periods (‘.’) are incorrect ‘v.b..’) as ‘Vibrato’ is one word. ‘Molto Vib’ or ‘m.v.’ better.  In addition, your abbreviation gets you into trouble in bar 13, where you have written ‘n.b.’ – which, whilst yes, I do understand it, would translate to ‘non ‘brato’!

4. What does the sideways triangle in Bars 1, 2, 10, 21 mean? (not in the Performance instructions key)

5. What is the rule for accidentals within a measure? My advice, with microtonal, but musicallyy uncomplicated piece like this, is (like Alban Berg), EVERY NOTE!!

6. Bars  25, 17, 19, 21 – these arpeggiando figures work best with slurs (in 4s)

7. Bar 21: the ‘glissando’ and the notation of the flageolets is a little contrary, and tautologous. It’s a grey area (and you have used the Ravel solution).

Hope that is helpful, and please let me know what you think – and tell me where I wrong!

Zhitao Lin to PSS
Thank you so much for your thoughtful guidance and detailed observations. I truly appreciate the time and effort you’ve taken in reviewing my piece, and your insights are incredibly helpful. I’m excited to go through your suggestions and make the necessary improvements.Here are my responses to your points:

1. Line 1: On the bridge and behind the bridge – This was my oversight. “On the bridge” was intended for the previous note marked m.s.p. (molto sul ponticello), but I mistakenly marked it on the following note. I’ll correct this to ensure clarity.

2. Bar 8: Circular bowing speed and intensity – Yes, the circular bowing should increase both in speed and intensity, creating a natural crescendo. The acceleration in speed is meant to mirror the increasing dynamics and expression.

3. Bar 11: ‘m.v.b.’ abbreviation – Thank you for pointing this out. I see now that my abbreviation “m.v.b.” (molto vibrato) could cause confusion, and I agree that ‘Molto Vib’ or ‘m.v.’ would be much clearer. I will revise this in the score and avoid similar abbreviations that could lead to misinterpretation, especially the ‘n.b.’ in Bar 13.

4. Sideways triangle in Bars 1, 2, 10, 21 – This indicates overpressure. I apologize for forgetting to include this in the performance instructions key, and I will add an explanation to avoid confusion.

5. Accidentals within a measure – I fully agree with your suggestion to mark every note with an accidental, especially with the microtonal elements present in the piece. I will ensure that each pitch is clearly indicated for clarity.

6. Bars 25, 17, 19, 21: Arpeggiando figures – You’re absolutely right again! Slurring these arpeggiated figures in groups of 4 would help them flow more naturally and make the phrasing clearer. I will revise the notation accordingly.

7. Bar 21: Glissando and flageolets – Here, I envisioned lightly touching the string with the left hand, similar to playing natural harmonics, while performing a glissando from a high harmonic position down to a lower one. I haven’t found the perfect way to notate this yet, so I should add a written explanation in the score to clarify this passage.

Thank you again for your thoughtful feedback. It’s invaluable and I’m working on making changes. Please let me know if there is anything else that is unclear!

PSS To Michael Siciliano Balsamo

I have been enjoying getting into the detail of your striking piece, and have questions, observations and suggestions for you. Lets get into a conversation which means that by the time we meet next month, we have a real dialogue going! Here we go:

Global: I would avoid defaulting too much to snap pizzicato in a solo piece, and particularly not on the open G string. I think we can come up with something more characterful and effective. What sound do you have in mind?

The buzzing C# tremolos (bars 1, 13) work well as a dense ricochet- which keeps up the tension.

Accidentals – whilst there are no inconsistencies, I would suggest more use of courtesy accidentals – for instance to clarify the pitches in the last gesture of bar 2

In bars 14 and 16 the stemless notes (without fermate) don’t have any temporal meaning in the context of this entirely pulse-tactus based notation. In order to effect an mixture of spacetime and rhythmic notation, font choices or clear delineation between one system and another is important. The situation that Berio found himself in with Gazzelloni over the notation of Sequenza 1 in 1958, is something we all know, and that resulted in composers such as Henze being brilliantly clear subsquently. As you have indicated a pause timing at the end of bar 15 and other places, you can solve the problem simply enough.

The string indications in bar 8 – what are they for?

The tempo indications in the 12″ box in bar nine are contradictory, unless ‘hold current speed’ is placed under the square bracket, and is contingent to the other rubato indications.

I hope that’s a useful start: looking forward to hearing from you.!

Michael Siciliano Balsamo to PSS

Thank you so much for your note. It’s an honor having  the opportunity to write a piece for you, and I look forward to meeting you next month.I have made all the needed changes and touched up a few rhythmic passages, so it is more readable. I am attaching the score in this email.

For measure 8, any diamond note heads with roman numerals are harmonics. The roman numerals are the string patterns.

The main goal was to write a very flashy, extensive, 2-minute virtuosic work. This is the first piece that I wrote as a graduate student, I guess you can call it my “first impression.” I hope you continue to enjoy reading through this work and I am very grateful to have you premiere it.

If there is anything that you would like me to revise, please let me know.

September 26^th

Juan Carlos Aliaga Del Bosque to Peter

I am very excited and grateful to be able to work with you and I will be happy to answer any questions.About the title (4), “Atramentum” means “Ink”. It has a two-fold connection with the piece. First, I have returned to writing most of my process by hand. Secondly, I have been looking for more freedom in my music (in this case through timing and rhythm) and how ink can take its own paths while writing was a good analogy for me.

In relation to the mood indication (3), this is totally true. I really appreciate these remarks as, after my engraving software stopped working, I have started using a new one and I am still getting consistent with the details.

About the ambiguity of the accidentals (1) and the dynamics (2), it is true that it can be clearer. I kept working in order to fix these issues and to represent better what I hear. I am attaching a file that might help understanding better the piece in case it is possible to revisit it.

Once again, thank you for bringing these issues and in case anything else arises, please let me know. I am looking forward to the seminar in November.

Peter to Juan Carlos Aliaga Del Bosque

Great to hear back so soon: I am sitting with my morning coffee, and it is a bright fresh autumn morning, after a night of rain, so fun to go through your thoughtful letter.

With regard to the title: I am passionate about the pen and pencil on the paper: I am a graphic artist myself, so this is important to me. Do you have a handwritten version of the piece. I would love to see it, and, in point of fact, I find that a composer’s approach to the paper, the timbre and texture of their hand, often gives me vital clues as to the substance and character of their work (and helps me with the touch of the bow to the string).