2. WHAT CAN BE BORROWED?

Table 1 makes the distinction between sound borrowing and musical borrowing within electroacoustic music compositions. Essentially they are both recorded sound material that can find its way into new electroacoustic works, however, breaking this down reveals some subtleties between the two types of materials.

Table 1. What can be borrowed?

¹ Lacasse refers to this as ‘allosonic’ where material is borrowed by rerecording or performing it live, rather than sampling from an original recording (2000: 38). This is distinct from ‘autosonic’ quotation, which takes from an existing recording by physically sampling it.

3. MOTIVATIONS FOR BORROWING

Borrowing activity within electroacoustic music may occur for a range of reasons as listed in Table 2. Burkholder (Reference Burkholder2018: 225) states ‘the case for borrowing is stronger when a purpose can be demonstrated, and is considerably weakened if no function for the borrowed material can be established’. Finding a purpose for the inclusion of borrowed elements can play a significant part in both the compositional and the listening processes, allowing the composer to communicate particular statements based upon the borrowing, and allowing the listener to make sense of its appearance within a new context. Justifications in Table 2 have been drawn primarily from programme notes or via conversations with the composers. In some cases, motivations can be inferred by the sense of narrative, approach or borrowing type observable in the music through listening. As with all terminology sets appearing in this article, the vocabulary is dynamic and it is hoped that with further study in this area, more terms will evolve to account for greater variation in motivation types.

Table 2. Motivations for borrowing

^a Tremblay, Cowboy Fiction (1998), CD liner notes.

^b Schedel, After | Applebox (Reference Schedel2018) programme notes, in email correspondence with the composer (2018).

^c This reminds me of a similar borrowing instruction found within Cage’s Imaginary Landscape no.5 (1952) for any 42 recordings. This work calls for a ‘set of 42 recordings, to be chosen by the producer from any phonographs, preferably jazz records’. Harley, www.allmusic.com/composition/imaginary-landscape-no-5-for-any-42-recordings-to-be-realized-on-tape-mc0002554133 (accessed 4 December 2018). Because the borrowings change with each performance, the work is different every time it is played.

^d Dhomont, Un autre Printemps (2000) CD liner notes.

^e Smalley, Sommeil de Rameau (Reference Smalley2014–Reference Smalley15), programme notes.

^f Thanks go to Kenneth Baird (European Opera Centre) for sharing this perspective with me, 2018.

^g Field,Being Dufay (2009), CD liner notes.

^h Emmerson intends that, ‘while they have private significance, the individual recordings elicit more shared – even universal – “resonances” in the listener.’ Email correspondence, 2018.

ⁱ Emmerson, Memory Machine, programme notes in email correspondence with the composer, 2018.

^j Email correspondence with Young, 2018.

^k Email correspondence with Young, 2018. Young credits Visa Kuoppala for identifying this initially unknown borrowing.

Many of these motivations crossover and overlap. Rather than being isolated justifications, these terms can merge together; for example, a composer can have several motivations for seeking out existing sources for their music-making and likewise their compositions may exude a number of rationales from the listener’s perspective. Motivations might be entirely unrelated to the act of intentional borrowing, yet borrowing happens as a by-product of the creative process as in the cases of serendipity and accidental borrowing. In other cases the motivation to borrow maybe intrinsic to a composer’s style, permeating through as a practice in a whole back catalogue of works (see Landy, ‘Re-composing Sounds … and Other Things’, in this issue).

3.1. Personal reflections on borrowing

Examining the vocabulary used by composers to describe their own works and personal borrowing activity has further illuminated the breadth of terminology in use. Taking note of how composers discuss their own sound borrowings shows great diversity in the composer’s perspective. Table 3 collates a handful of reflections from composers acknowledging their borrowing activity.

Table 3. Personal reflections on borrowing

^a Turcote, Delerium (2007–8), CD liner notes.

^b Dhomont, Chiaroscuro (1987), CD liner notes.

^c Normandeau, Venture (1998), CD liner notes.

^d Smith, Continental Rift (1995), CD liner notes.

^e Dufort, Gen_3 (2007), CD liner notes.

These reflections and descriptions of borrowing have been sourced from programme notes, which deserve a note of credit here. Programme notes have proved to be vital to this research, enabling the discovery of borrowing varieties and providing insight into the composers’ perspective of how and why borrowings have taken place. By acknowledging their sources many of the composers in this article have facilitated the studying of sound transference from one place to the next and have importantly opened up sources of influence and musical repertoire previously unknown to me. Crediting in programme notes is also connected to legalities and may be a way for the composer to signal the granting of permissions. There has, of course, been works that engage in borrowing without transcribed credit. These works have provided hours of fun in an attempt to identify borrowings. Parmerud’s Necropolis: City of the Dead (2011) lines up a series of musical borrowings without mention of the original sources. By aural means I notice quotes from Wagner (Ride of the Valkyries, 1870), Palestrina (Kyrie from Missa Papae Marcelli, 1562), Bach (G Major Cello suite, 1717–23) and Beethoven (C Minor Pathétique Sonata, 1789). No doubt there are more within this work, but these are reliant on the listener’s recognition of the originals. Part of the listening pleasure here is recognising the borrowing and observing its function within a new context.

4. BORROWING TYPES

After seeing what motivates composers to borrow in the first instance, it is important to turn one’s attention to the types of borrowing, which appear in the existing repertoire. A plenitude of words are currently in circulation to describe acts of sound borrowing. Looking more closely at the individual features of each term demonstrates distinct differences between them. These differences are significant enough to demonstrate a wide diversity of approaches taken, which may all constitute a form of borrowing. Table 4 lays out the borrowing types terminology. It should be noted that examples from the electroacoustic repertoire have been used to accompany these terms and definitions as a means of highlighting the borrowing in action. Many of the examples selected have been led by the vocabulary already in use by composers discussing their own work.

Table 4. Borrowing types

^a Burkholder, Grove Music Online, Entry for ‘Borrowing’, https://doi-org.ezproxy.hope.ac.uk/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.52918, 2001 (accessed 06/07/18).

^b Quotation in electroacoustic music may refer to either the use of an existing recording of music from a particular time and context, or a personal recording made of a (score-based) work for recreation purposes. The difference may be significant since some existing recordings have additional data captured such as the recording technology used, ambience and historical performance context, which in some cases can feed into the new compositional setting once borrowed. A bespoke recording of a piece of music intended for use in a new work, with the right conditions, would likely capture the music void of its historical beginnings. This difference can be heard for example in Andean’s Maledetta (2011), the source material for which includes both the historical recording of Maria Callas’s performance of Cherubini’s Medea and a bespoke recording of the piano transcription of the same opera. Despite quoting the same work, the significant temporal distance between these two sources shines through their various transformations, to become a key sonic element of the piece.

^c Salazar, email correspondence, 2012.

^d Dhomont, Frankenstein Symphony (1997), CD liner notes.

^e Dolden, Show Tunes in Samarian Starlight (2012), CD liner notes.

^f Castelões, Studies in Plagiarism #1: In the limbo of Polymusic (2003), programme notes, email correspondence with the composer 2018.

^g Wishart, Imago (2002), CD liner notes.

^h Burkholder, Grove Music Online, entry for ‘Allusion’, https://doi-org.ezproxy.hope.ac.uk/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.52852, 2001 (accessed 2 May 2018).

ⁱ Daoust, Fantaisie (1986), CD liner notes.

Evaluating the terms on offer in Table 4 shows that the boundaries between many of them are fuzzy and far from distinct. Some terms in this table could easily be interchangeable and it is curious to see how composers have opted for more comfortable and acceptable terms for their actions as a safeguard against potential accusation of pilfering. In some cases the terms are mere synonyms for the same action (‘sampling’ and ‘taking’), but others are clearly distinct and defined by their nuances; for example, ‘stealing’ comes hand in hand with its brazen lack of permissions, while ‘copying’ is characterised by its lack of physical sound lifting. The last three entries for this table stray a little off topic, but are still important to consider within this discussion for their reliance on borrowing. These three actions imply borrowing beyond ‘cut and paste’ by going a step further in suggesting the composer’s hand in claiming some level of authorship in working with the borrowing.

5. DURATIONS

When examining borrowed sound and music in electroacoustic music, there appears to be little discussion of how much was borrowed and why or what impact this has on reception. Durations are significant here since they may enable recognition and identification of the original from the listener’s perspective. Borrowing a grain, particle or fragment of existing music compared to the entirety of a piece will understandably give vastly differing results. Examining the gradations between these extremes has revealed a variety of durations that can either fully represent or vaguely suggest the presence of audio imports.

Travelling down through the borrowing durations shown in Table 5, it is possible to see the repertoire examples consuming increasingly more and more of the said original works, also reflected in Figure 1. There may be an appetite amongst listeners to see how composers show their hand, creative interventions or customisations when using larger durations from pre-existing music and sources to warrant new authorship. All works engaging with borrowing have this consideration, however, borrowings of smaller durations, sometimes known as ‘partial importations’ (Holm-Hudson Reference Holm-Hudson1997: 19)Footnote ³ – such as a grain, fragment, sample, phrase, extract, excerpt, passage and project file – deal more with integration and embedding issues (how they fit with surrounding materials), while longer, more substantial borrowings, verging on ‘total importations’ (ibid.: 20),Footnote ⁴ such as majority and entirety durations, exist as adaptations or arrangements of the original work or source. As with the borrowing types terminology (Table 4), some of these duration terms overlap (excerpt, extract, passage) and some have a more flexible duration that should be taken into account. For example, a ‘sample’ has no fixed duration and will vary from piece to piece. A sample may also be seen as a passage, extract, phrase or fragment, while a ‘plunderphone’ can also be considered as a phrase, fragment or passage. It is difficult to assign exact timings for these terms or to differentiate between them since they all overlap and are used figuratively by the composers in the table. As the table demonstrates, some composers have assigned durational timings within their descriptions (excerpt = 2½ minutes), but generally these remain adjustable without precise timings. Relativity appears more important here as an increasingly larger extraction of material is borrowed.

Table 5. Borrowing durations

^a Olwnik online review, www.allmusic.com/album/moms-mw0000684529 (accessed 8 May 2018).

^b In email correspondence with the composer (2018).

^c Normandeau, Venture (1998), CD liner notes.

^d Verandi, Figuras Flamencas, programme notes, www.marioverandi.de/figuras-flamencas/ (accessed 23 March 2018).

^e Oswald, in Norma Igma interview, online resource, www.plunderphonics.com/xhtml/xinterviews.html (accessed 16 April 2018).

^f Grove Music Online, entry for ‘Phrase’, https://doi-org.ezproxy.hope.ac.uk/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.21599, 2001 (accessed 2 May 2018).

^g Email correspondence with the composer (2018).

^h Tilmouth, Grove Music Online, https://doi-org.ezproxy.hope.ac.uk/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.21025, 2001 (accessed 6 July 2018).

ⁱ Applebaum, programme note for Variations on Variations on a Theme by Mozart (2006). Composer’s website: http://web.stanford.edu/~applemk/portfolio-works-variations-on-variations.html (accessed 22 July 2018).

Figure 1. Borrowing durations

A small note is added here about legalities since anyone embarking on borrowing activity should be aware of the law surrounding sampling. There was a time when durations were significant within this discussion, however, this is now a more complex and changing minefield with possible variations from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

6. MODIFICATIONS AND EMBEDDING TECHNIQUES

Borrowing existing sound and music and embedding it within a new electroacoustic music work often involves some sort of modification via sound transformation tools, editing, or sequencing techniques such as layering or juxtapositions. Providing terminology for modification types can illuminate how the composer has treated the borrowed elements within their works. Here it may be important to consider that ‘the incorporation of borrowed material can take place anywhere along a continuum; at [one] extreme, the original meaning of the quotation can be unimpaired; at the other the quotation can be totally stripped of its original meaning’ (Ballantine Reference Ballantine1984: 73). Modification and processing may play a part in this stripping of meaning, and in some cases, at a cost to audiences’ recognition of the borrowing. In some cases, modifications to the borrowed element may enable new statements and commentaries to take place through re-contextualisation. Studying modifications may also contribute to the uncovering of programmatic detail. This can be observed when considering the following examples, where both the choice of existing music and the way in which it is modified and embedded in its new setting are important:

1. 1. An extract from Puccini’s opera Madama Butterfly (1904) is placed amidst electronic tones in Oliveros’s tape composition Bye Bye Butterfly (1965) to become the narrative that ‘bids farewell not only to the music of the 19th century but also to the system of polite morality of that age and its attendant institutionalized oppression of the female sex’.Footnote ⁵

2. 2. The use of Wagner’s Parsifal (1882), subjected to filtering techniques, within Ussachevsky’s Wireless Fantasy (1960) enables the listener to imagine the sound coming from a ‘short-wave radio broadcast’ (Beaudoin Reference Beaudoin2007: 146).

3. 3. Musical extracts from Schumann’s Kinderszenen (Scenes from Childhood, Op. 15, 1838) sporadically placed, chopped up, hidden and revealed in Dhomont’s acousmatic work Forêt profonde (1994), are significant for understanding the work as ‘a guided tour of the childhood soul’.Footnote ⁶

Further vocabulary describing the types of modification and embedding techniques are collated in Table 6 to demonstrate the variety of options composers have used when integrating borrowings.

Table 6. Borrowing modifications and embedding techniques

¹ Emmerson, Resonances (Reference Emmerson2007), programme note, email correspondence with the composer (2018).

² Gibson, Slumber (2006), DVD liner notes.

³ Scanner, Sung Back (2006), DVD liner notes.

⁴ Copeland, Early signals (2001), CD liner notes.

⁵ Email correspondence with Smalley (2018).

⁶ Melody identified by Kathryn Tickel and Agustín Fernadez, email correspondence (2018).

⁷ Deschênes, Indigo (2000), CD liner notes.

⁸ Alvarez, Mambo à la Braque (1990), CD liner notes.

Modification and embedding technique classifications are by no means exclusive or discrete within individual works. By and large, most compositions engaging with borrowing adopt a range of methods to accommodate these imports. A composition that starts out with a fragmented splattering of unidentifiable sound grains may progress into a showcase of fairly obvious yet intermittent passages of borrowings. The terms ‘collage’ and ‘mosaic’ imply borrowing procedures on a structural scale. Both these approaches can enable multiple borrowings to come together, through linear juxtaposition. A vertical equivalent here is layered/mixed, where borrowed materials can be stacked upon each other as a means of modifying the original’s appearance. ‘Mash-up’ and ‘remix’ are terms absorbed from popular music, but seem relevant here for providing a viable compositional approach when borrowed materials are used for highly recognisable effect and when longer durations are being considered. Reconfigured, disintegrated and obliterated could all be subsumed under the term ‘modified’, but these have been unpacked for purposes of showing subtle variations within commonplace modifications. Enhanced is also a modification technique employed to retain the original features of the borrowing, in opposition to obliterated. When a borrowing is enhanced this may confirm a motivation on the part of the composer to celebrate, showcase or bring to light the qualities, associations and meanings of the original borrowed material. Overall, it is apparent that many of the terms presented in Table 6 may be interpreted in different ways – their flexibility and fuzziness are attributes useful for composers looking at the possibilities for customising, altering and embedding borrowed material. A small side note here acknowledges that embedding techniques in electroacoustic music can often prevent the isolation of the borrowing due to problems with segmenting. Fixed media works culminate in a single audio track (stereo works) and if borrowing takes place, these imports are embedded within the mix. If buried amidst other material, it might not be possible to locate, with certainty, the instance of borrowing.

7. COPYING AS BORROWING

A further collection of terms has been included to address the issue of copying as an area of sound borrowing. So far my discussion has dealt with aspects of digital data transfer: a physical lifting of audio from one piece to the next, however, some borrowing activity belongs to the realm of reproduction and recreation. It might be useful to think of the analogy of instrumental ‘style composition’; for example, ‘composing a string quartet in the style of Haydn’. No physical borrowing may take place in these types of borrowing, just the style, traits or essence of the composer’s original work. Copying as borrowing might take the form of a trace, structure or sound quality similarity found within a new work. This type of borrowing is less overt than all previous examples and many of the terms belonging to copying function through sound approximation from sharing certain sonic attributes. Table 7 presents some of these copying possibilities in more detail.

Table 7. Copying

^a Katzer, Rondo (1974), CD liner notes.

^b Daoust, Fantasie (1986), CD liner notes.

^c Bayle, Grande polyphonie (1974), CD liner notes.

8. GENRE HOPPING

The repertoire covered in this article has presented some interesting examples of genre hopping. The receptivity of electroacoustic music to other musical styles, sound resources and inspirations demonstrates its openness and its suitability as a canvas for borrowing to take place within. Its acceptance of these seemingly wayward, distant and unrelated sound sources is a significant advantage. The repertoire study in this research has included instrumental and vocal music from as early as medieval times all the way to contemporary music, making the leap and transition into electroacoustic music. Opera, Westerns, commercial music and national anthems have also made appearances within electroacoustic music creations, further demonstrating flexibility in accommodating borrowings within a hybrid fashion. Burkholder reminds us that:

9. LOOKING FORWARD

The data collation appearing in this article was undertaken for the purposes of better understanding the landscape of borrowing practices within electroacoustic music. What has been provided here is a framework potentially useful for composers interested in involving sampling within their own music-making. This framework may also find use in accompanying the experiences of listeners who may hear and appreciate borrowing activity in the repertoire covered in the tables. It is my hope that further investigations will take place based upon this presentation of terminology and repertoire; for example, in musicological study, audience reception analysis and new compositional work that may emerge in response to the tables.