The Chord Catalog of John Cage and Paul ZukofskyFootnotes1. http://www.musicalobservations.com/recordings/cp2_103.html 2. While this compendium was ALWAYS called the CC, the things being constructed were ALWAYS called “aggregates” (i.e. not chords!); but in deference to our own "tradition schlamperei", I retain the CC designation. NB: violinists normally refer to 2-pitch “aggs” as intervals; and 3 or 4-pitch “aggs” as chords. 3. While learning and practicing scales is the only true foundation for classical technique, as well as the harmonic implications of intonation control, because of their formulaic fingerings, scales (unless practiced one finger only for the entire string (and doing so for each finger!)) do not provide violinists easy entry to string geometry. 4. Strings were most often labelled with Roman numerals i.e. E-string = I; A-string = II; D-string = III; G-string = IV. 5. While the vast majority of my responses were provided i-cs, some responses must have “slipped through the cracks”, as there were many pages covered with ranges and responses, some of which were (inevitably) missed in the copying process, or were deliberately excluded (if my answers were unclear to John). In addition, if John extrapolated new “aggs” from information already on i-cs, he might not place said extrapolations onto additional i-cs, as the specifics had not first been checked with me (and extrapolations increased as i-cs increased). Finally, and especially during the composition of the last two books, we were both under time-pressure, and the desire to see the thing finished. 6. The 65 manila tabbed cards were originally numbered by John (in the upper right corner). His system was ordinal by large category (each large group (X playing string)) starting with 1 (the tab card for I string playing X was never created, or it was lost, as I have no recollection of ever seeing it). I was concerned that, should the cards “fall” out of order, it would be a nuisance to regroup things. I therefore renumbered the tabbed cards 1 - 65 (lower right corner, in red) in the order in which I found them when John presented me the box containing the original CC. Hence the different Manila # cols. of Table 1. 7. I-cs 1.24; 18.22; and 51.04; which account for the difference between the number of original i-cs (546) vs the number of i-c “images” (549) of this web-version. 8. The number to the left of (.) is the PZ tabbed card number; the number to the right is the i-c order number within the tab; i.e.all manila tabbed i-cs are double-zeros, i.e. the manila i-c for “cat.” #1 is 1.00; 1.01 means “cat.” # 1; first i-c. 9. The slanted line does NOT mean glissando. A pitch followed by a slanted line without a termination pitch, means that the upper range is boundless. 10. I.e. finger-pairs 1 & 2; 2 & 3; or 3 & 4. NB: violinists never use the left thumb to finger pitches (except for rare tricks), and convention labels the index finger “1”; the renowned middle-finger “2”; ring finger 3; pinky 4. 11. We have all grown up with the violinistic myth that the fingers of the left hand can move, or can be made to move, independently of each other; but the fact is that, if some fingers are arranged in certain ways, it becomes mechanically impossible to move other fingers. Any pedagogue claiming otherwise is ignorant of basic physiology. 12. The twelve two-stringed combinations, with permutations are: G & D strings; G/A strings; G/E; D/A; D/E; & A/E; plus reversals. 13. The outer-inner string distinction works a little better if you think about adjacencies: the outer panels have only one adjacent string; the inner panels have two. So both outer and inner panels start off by exploring these 2-string adjacencies. They then continue with the possible three-string adjacencies which contain those 2-string adjacencies: E starts: I-II for E, I-II-III is the only 3-string adjacency that contains I-II; Then both move on to the non-adjacent 2-strings: for E, I-III, and for A, II-IV. Then these non-adjacencies are resolved with 3 strings: for E, I-III-II, and for A, II-IV-III. 14. I need to emphasize that while all FE “agg”s derive from the CC, the CC is not a collection of all “agg”s that appear in the FE. As of this writing, no data exists as to the exact relationship between the CC and the FE “agg”s (and I see no value in attempting to collate such data). 15. NB: numbers within the matrix are the number of i-cs. They are not the number of images in this presentation. 16. Good luck switching between col.s “B” & “G” of Table 8 while holding down the first and third fingers (or any other similar configuration). The difficulty is primarily due to the fact that there is no independent innervation for each finger. Also note that 3-finger combinations (i.e. 4 things (strings) taken 3 at a time) present an additional large set of befuddlements with the added distraction of picking the proper strings. LIFT YOUR FINGERS! CLEAR YOUR HAND! 17. In my opinion, it is highly questionable as to whether a work such as the FEshould even be approached using the standard static system. 18. Such string jumping is utterly applicable to a work such as the second Paganini “Caprice” where, as one cannot do everything on adjacent strings, one might as well be consistent, and save some effort. And let us not forget Locatelli, etc., etc. The standard avoidance of jumping strings is yet another example of reduced motion masquerading as efficiency, combined with (false premise) attempts to maintain as “smooth” a "line" as possible.
|
|