Fixed-pitch and Adjustable-pitch Instruments
Recently, I have found myself repeatedly having a discussion regarding the relationship between accompaniment and solo instruments. I greatly dislike these distinct roles, and have always thought that the collaborating instruments should be more of a duet than a soloist and accompanist, not only for the sake of the music, but for the relationship of the musicians, as it seems the role of accompanist is always doing way more work than the soloist. What I dislike more than this obscure and unfair assignment of roles is the sound, and I’ve never really understood why until recently.
To be upfront about it, I really dislike the combination of piano and solo instrument. It has never sounded right to me, and rarely is approached as a musical combination of instruments, but rather done out of convenience. Yes, there are several composers that have taken the piano as an accompanist and made it sound fantastic (Paul Hindemith and Robert Kyr are two that initially come to mind), but for the most part what occurs is the composer writes a piece for solo instrument and some sort of ensemble (ex. Mozart’s Concerto for Bassoon in B-flat Major, K. 191) which had to be distilled into a combination of piano and solo instrument because no one could ever get the desired ensemble together to perform the work as intended. What results from this is a piano part that is not intended for the piano, lacks its original instrumental character, and is jammed into the confines of the pianist’s ten fingers, which, I’ll gladly admit, is not nearly as restrictive as many other instruments in existence. The piano is used purely out of convenience (only one player needed, and pianos are EVERYWHERE) and not as a piano.
But what of the works that are not transcriptions? What of the pieces that actually were written for piano and whatever solo instrument it is playing for? I had to think long and hard about this one. What I learned through this search was that I like the sound of piano by itself, so its not that I dislike the sound of the instrument. I also quite enjoy pieces for multiple pianos, so I cannot say that I dislike the sound of piano playing with other instruments. Pianos are used to great effect in the chamber works of composers like George Crumb, and are massively important in the large ensemble works of composers like David Gillingham, Carter Pann, and Michael Daugherty, but there is just something irritating about the sound of something like piano and voice, or piano and violin. I eventually realized it has to do with harmony, not style, or timbre, or craft, and as a result of this realization, my dislike must be restated as such: I dislike the sound of a single fixed-pitched instrument playing with a single adjustable-pitched instrument.
An explanation is needed here. Such instruments like the piano, marimba, crotales, organ, or vibraphone are fixed-pitched instruments. They are unable to change their intonation during a performance in any realistic capacity, and thus are stuck within an artificial tuning system called equal temperament. Not to scoff at the equal temperament tuning system, which is truly an ingenious system, but it ruins the natural relationship that exists between pitches in any given interval or chord. The reason the system works is because it relies on the human ear (and, subsequently, the brain) to bend pitches retroactively so that they “sound” in tune within any given relationship. This can be easily demonstrated by an exercise that I do with my ear training class every now and then: choose a pitch at the piano and sustain the pitch by singing it. After the pitch has stabilized, play a chord on the piano where that pitch is the root, all the while sustaining that same pitch with the voice. Then play it as a major third of a chord, and listen to the sustained pitch drastically lower as it is physically adjusted to be in tune, despite the pitch not changing on the piano. This exercise can continue by placing the pitch as a minor third, perfect fifth, minor seventh, etc. within a chord, each requiring a completely different placement than where the piano will actually allow it to sound. This being said, it seems obvious that, though equal temperament allows for such instruments to exist as they do, it is very much artificial and begins to break down when placed in certain contexts.
This system is why two fixed-pitch instruments playing together sounds fine to me (because they exist in the same tuning system), or why in the context of a chamber or large ensemble, the piano sounds great (its presence is to provide timbrel and character definition, not produce all of the harmony). But when it is placed along side an adjustable-pitched instrument – an instrument that is able to accommodate the needs of the harmonic series and the acoustic relationships that exists between each pitch – there is a clash that, to my ear, is unforgivable. The adjustable-pitched instrument, trying to explore and develop this marvelous world we call harmony, is forced to match pitch with the artificially tuned piano. The result is either massive intonation problems as the instrument playing “in tune” is unable to match pitch with the “out of tune” instrument (piano), or the adjustable-pitch instrument succumbs to the confines of equal temperament and destroys not only its potential brilliance of harmony, but also the resonance that would natural exist within the instrument. Singers are most at risk for this flatness of sound because, unlike instrumentalists, they have no buttons to push to create notes, and thus have to work even harder to sing out of tune to match the pitch of the piano.
While I do realize that this combination of instruments is used in excess throughout the musical community, I feel it important for these thoughts to be voiced. I like the piano and its fixed-pitch relatives, but I feel that the convenience of such an instrument is at the detriment of the natural acoustic qualities that so many of us find attractive on the myriad of adjustable-pitched instruments. Would anyone out there like to offer up their opinion? Be it in opposition or not, I’m interested to see what others have come up with regarding the situation, if they have thought about it at all.
Methinks that you should do a bit more research into the historical application of keyboard instruments. The accompaniment roles existed for a reason, whether or not you like them. It’s kind of superficial and naive to call them “unfair.”
I like some Hindemith, but most of his piano parts are beyond unreasonable. How does this make his use “brilliant,” especially within the context of Gebrauchtsmusik?
As for the rest of it, well, just deal. There isn’t any better solution, and if you don’t like piano with other instruments, then you can spend the rest of your life not playing it, and not writing for it. But wait! there’s more:
1) What about the issues of intonation that occur between two instruments? There are intonation issues between any two instruments–literally–whether it be two clarinets, a clarinet and a piano, a clarinet and a bassoon, a clarinet and a trumpet, or a clarinet and a viola. All instruments must adjust to play with other instruments, especially between families. How is this any less artificial than playing with a piano? Admittedly, some of the adjustments may be smaller, but they still exist.
I have the feeling that you don’t work with singers much. Nearly all singers in the world sing through context of pitches. A singer doesn’t sing differently singing with a clarinet than he does with a piano. The instruments provide pitches, and they match them. This is how singing works for nearly everyone. Have you ever worked with singers struggling to sing harmony instead of melody? We naturally gravitate toward matching pitch, regardless of what the pitches are or in what tuning system they are. (Of course, all bets are off with the avant-garde, which requires more skill than most singers have.)
To respond to a few of your statements:
1. Regardless of why the role exists, I find that 9 times out of 10 the music is not intended to be in a solo/accompaniment setting. When you consider dialogue, which is rampant in music throughout as many time periods and genres as I can think of, the roles of each musician cannot be classified as soloist and accompanist. People are starting to realize this now and are I’ve noticed a healthy change in how newer works are being written and presented, as well as how older works are being reinterpreted. Finally, even though it might just be a surface level statement, please notice that your degree is now called “Collaborative Piano” and not “Accompaniment,” which it had been called for years prior.
2. Hindemith’s sonatas do not bother me, despite mostly being for solo instrument and piano. Because of this, I think his writing is brilliant, because he had figured out a way to deal with that nasty sound that comes from that class of tuning systems. His compositional style and the technique required to perform either part is a matter of opinion, and should be discussed later.
3. The intonation issues that arise from adjustable-pitch instruments are based on the acoustics of each instrument, not the nature of harmony. For example, the written E5 on a B-flat clarinet is going to be quite sharp because the wholes of the instrument we drilled to tune A4 below it. That’s not because of the partials of the harmonic series, it is because of an acoustical flaw built into the instrument. If nothing else, the performer has to work against this artificial obstacle to achieve true harmony. These do need to be overcome to adhere to the natural tendencies of harmony so that instruments can play on equal ground, but this equal ground is still nowhere near equal temperament.
4. My work with singers is not as expansive as yours, no. I have, however, heard my share of singers sustain pitches over a harmony, then the harmony changes, requiring a subtle readjustment of the sustained pitch, and most singers are unrelenting in holding that same pitch as it would be heard from the piano and not where it should sit in the harmony. I have also witnessed choirs that, while not consisting of trained singers, contain musicians with good ears. In these settings, yes, the tendency is to match pitch, but the urge to place the pitch correctly within the harmony is overwhelming, which is why you so often hear choirs singing in clusters, all singing the correct note, but each placed in a different position based on where the individual thinks the harmony is in tune. That opens a new discussion on ear training and how one perceives pitch and intonation which I do not want to get into right now.
Your thoughts are interesting, but they may be more provoking if you do not initially assume I have no idea what I am talking about.
If you want to stretch this even further, though, you would have to break down the adjustable-pitched instruments even further also. Stringed instruments are going to be closer to truly obtaining the natural relationship of the harmonic series, (in the right hands of course) in regards to dividing the string to obtain the correct frequency, than any wind instrument. G# should sound higher than Ab. A feat that is easier to obtain on a stringed instrument than any other instrument, yet still very difficult if it were to be analyzed closely. Yet our ear adjusts when hearing an A major scale and recognizes scale degree 7 as having that tendency to resolve to tonic, even on an equal-tempered piano. The same applies to F minor and scale degree 3 wanting to move to 2 and then 1. Our ear adjusts to the context.
Wind and brass instruments are going to be inconsistent depending upon the embouchure placement, air stream consistency, and multiple other factors. This can then be taken even further when regarding brass instruments that contain a certain number of valves and rely upon the overtone series to create different pitches depending upon the register. A flute or oboe, on the other hand, has more keys to adjust the pitch properly and will therefore also sound differently from a brass or string instrument.
In this regards, an orchestra, although encompassing many adjustable-pitch instruments, should also sound unpleasant to your ear because of all of these factors that affect pitch from the different families of instruments. It is essentially the same idea. Instruments adjusting their pitch to sound “in tune” with the rest of the ensemble. Why do you comment only upon the relationship of piano and solo instrument/voice, though, and ignore this?
Do you have either absolute pitch or perfect relative pitch to the point where you notice to such a degree these differences? I find it hard to believe that your ear is that picky to the point where you find piano and some other instrument distasteful yet it chooses to ignore the same principle given an ensemble of varied instruments that would create the same effect.
As a singer who’s sung in chorus and as a soloist with piano accompaniment, we recognize the context of our performance and intuitively adjust to sound in tune with what medium is accompanying us. It’s not difficult, just as it shouldn’t be difficult for a flutist to adjust his or her pitch when playing in an ensemble such as a woodwind quintet despite whether all of the intervals are played in tune with the harmonic series. Even if that’s so, and they do not adjust, they’re going to be looked upon as the element that’s wrong in the group not the rest of the “out of tune” players who are listening to the ensemble and adjusting accordingly.
Jeremy:
Please see my response to Evan regarding instrument tendencies. Also, it seems you have supported my point by saying that choirs intuitively adjust their pitch to be in tune according to the harmony, so why would that not be expected of a flute player? Well, it is, and good ensembles know this, which is why I have little issue with good ensembles that are aware of harmonic shifts within their rep and place pitches accordingly. If a melodic line is projecting a certain harmony, then it is also important that each pitch be placed accordingly on a melodic level. If the harmonies switch every chord, however, the factor that determines pitch placement is purely harmonic, and not melodic.
As far as my ear goes, I am aware when I hear a minor seventh that has not been placed low enough in a dominant, or a minor third that has not been raised to accommodate harmonic context. Aren’t you? The reason an orchestral setting does not bother me is because they are adjusting their pitches, just like the sustained voice adjusting the pitch to fit within the chord. For the most part, it happens automatically with trained musicians. My issue with fixed-pitch instruments are not geared towards the performer, but the instrument, which is completely incapable of doing such and must rely on the ear to retroactively adjust the pitches accordingly. I view this as an issue in which I have no solution. It bothers me, and maybe I’m the only one, but I strongly feel there is a direction that can be taken to improve this dilemma.
I’ll just say that in my Synesthetic experience, I see different shades of color. In the case that a piano is performing with a trumpet or cello, I’ll see whatever colors there may be, but because of the tuning, one color might be a strong or bold shade while the other might be a pale shade. I don’t know what it’s worth, but I find it interesting and just another way to experience harmony. Again, that’s just for me and every person who has Synesthesia experiences things differently.
It is very interesting subject. Thanks for posting it. Nobody can deny that in majority of cases the piano is interpreted as an accompaniment instrument. But first, other non-fixed pitch instruments may be similarly interpreted. Have you listen to the early sonatas for violin and piano by Mozart? (Actually the real titles are: The sonatas for the PIANO and violin). In these compositions the violin, rather than the piano, is the accompaniment.
Second, I think your categorization of likeness of certain combinations of instruments doesn’t have to do with the artistic value of music. I am sure that one can write beautiful music for any combination of instruments through the avoidance of the traditional functional differentiation of these instruments.
All valid points. Thanks for sharing!
last week our group held a similar discussion about this topic and you show something we have not covered yet, thanks.
- Lora