compositions
A list of my works. Scores are available as PDF downloads; some pieces include programme notes and recordings.
-
oh tiempo tus pirámides (2026)
to Matthias Lorenz and Miroslav Beinhauer
Otro (muy consultado en esta zona) es un mero laberinto de letras, pero la página penúltima dice «Oh tiempo tus pirámides». Ya se sabe: por una línea razonable o una recta noticia hay leguas de insensatas cacofonías, de fárragos verbales y de incoherencias.
—Jorge Luis Borges, La Biblioteca de Babel
-
quietly come, quietly go (2026)
In memoriam Clarence Barlow
The ocean is deathless
The islands rise and die
Quietly come, quietly go
A silent swaying breath—Agnes Martin
-
and if you were a fiddler, then you were a fiddler (2024)
to Sinestéticas Collective
There’s no way around it, you’ll become a fiddler too, he said
and Pa Sigvald said if that’s what it was like, that he was a fiddler and should be a fiddler, then that’s how it was, he was a good player already, as far as playing goes he was already an accomplished fiddler, and if you were a fiddler, then you were a fiddler, there was little and nothing to do about that, he would become a fiddler, his son as well, and that was not a surprise, because both his father, old Asle, and his grandfather, old Pa Sigvald, had been fiddlers, to be a fiddler was a family fate, even if being a fiddler was reckoned to be bad luck, yes that it was, Pa Sigvald said, but if you were a fiddler yes then you were a fiddler, if that’s how it was, yes, there was nothing to do about that, not much, yes, in his opinion, said Pa Sigvald, and if he was asked where it came from, he answered that it probably came from grief, grieving over something, or just grief, and in the music the grief could lighten and become soaring and the soaring could become happiness and joy, so therefore music was needed, therefore he had to play, and some people had something left of this grief and that’s why there were many who enjoyed listening to the playing, that’s how it was, because the music lifted their life and gave it height, whether they were holding a wake or celebrating a wedding or people were just meeting to dance and celebrate, but why they were the only ones who were given the fate of the fiddler, yes he couldn’t say why, of course not, and he had never had much knowledge or wisdom, but he’d been a good fiddler since he was just a boy, since he was Asle’s age, just like Asle was a good fiddler now too, they were alike in so many things he and Asle, Pa Sigvald said, and just as he had followed his father when he was Asle’s age and his granddad was playing in a wedding, now Asle was going to follow his father and get his training, and later in the summer he would come with his father when he played at an ordinary dance and he would come with his father when he played at a wake, the way he himself had come with his father, to weddings, wakes, and dances, but whether he liked it, whether he liked that his son should also become a fiddler, no that was something else altogether, and no one would ask about that anyway, a fiddler’s fate is just that, a fate, but he who was without property had to manage as best as he could with the gift God had given him, that’s how it was, that was
And tonight you’ll try to be a fiddler, Pa Sigvald said—Jon Fosse, Trilogy
-
things forgotten and things remembered (2024)
to Ryszard Lubieniecki
This composition uses the ‘Estampie Retrové’—the earliest surviving fragment of keyboard music (ca. 1360)—as source material for its algorithmic manipulations. The music sheet of this estampie is part of the so-called Robertsbridge Codex, found among the manuscripts of the Robertsbridge Abbey, now in ruins. The manuscript of this codex (actually composed of two leaves of music notation bound among other papers and, thus, not strictly a codex per se) was discovered in the mid-19th century and is now held at the British Library (catalogue number Add MS 28550).
-
okno, okno, okno (2023)
The so-called “number stations” are shortwave radio broadcasts whose only purpose is to transmit encoded messages in the form of a series of numbers, words, and other patterns of audio signals. These transmissions, which have been reported for over a century and are still in use today, are believed to carry sensitive information to intelligence officers operating in foreign countries. With the use of cryptographic techniques such as one-time pads, agencies can securely transmit messages that are virtually undecipherable by anyone other than their intended recipient. As a result, for anyone else, the patterns in these signals carry no information and are completely indistinguishable from pure randomness.
okno, okno, okno is a four-part multichannel electroacoustic work that explores such broadcasts, some of which date back from the Cold War period, while others were intercepted during the time of its composition. Composed by processing these shortwave sources through an analogue synthesiser, this piece employs algorithmic looping techniques coupled with some improvisational elements. It thus offers a window into these mysterious signals that constantly surround us and uses repetition as a method for both exploring and deconstructing them.
The fours parts are:
• E07: “English Man” (Russian station, active)
• G11: “Strich” (Polish station, inactive)
• S25: Russian Man “Control” (Russian station, active)
• S03: “Okno” (Czech station, inactive) -
methinks it is like a weasel (2021)
to the Neues Klaviertrio Dresden
HAMLET. Do you see yonder cloud that’s almost in shape of a camel?
POLONIUS. By the mass, and ’tis like a camel, indeed.
HAMLET. Methinks it is like a weasel.
POLONIUS. It is backed like a weasel.
HAMLET. Or like a whale?
POLONIUS. Very like a whale.—William Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act III, Scene 2
methinks it is like a weasel (2021) is an algorithmic composition which explores how a population of ‘musical organisms’ can evolve over time on a given environment using principles borrowed from the theory of evolution. This piece employs what is known as a genetic algorithm, a type of computer algorithm that simulates the process of natural selection, and which can be used to generate and select data organisms. These organisms become increasingly better adapted to a given environment at every iteration of the process.
In the natural world, the genetic code of a sexually reproduced organism is given by a combination of the genetic codes inherited from its parents. If this combination is good, the organism will likely survive and generate offspring; otherwise, the organism may die without first reproducing and thus its traits are not passed along to the next generation. Occasionally, random gene mutations can occur in the genetic code of an organism. In the odd chance that this mutation is beneficial, this organism can end up being slightly better fit in relation to its environment than its peers, which can give it a survival edge. In such rare cases, the mutation can end up becoming dominant in its species as time goes by. Through the use of this process of combining the genetic codes of the fittest parents and occasionally applying random mutations, further generations are likely to become fitter for their environment than earlier ones, due to the cumulative gains of these incremental but tiny individual benefits. The algorithm I wrote for this composition employs this exact natural process to handle algorithmic data representing sequences of notes and chords.
This composition is made out of seven sections, each representing a different environment with its own genetic algorithmic process and parameters (e.g. available pool of genes, population size, chance of mutation, etc.). The initial measures of each section show what an ideal individual for this environment would look like, i.e. the fittest possible combination of genes for that given environment. These individuals consist of one or two measures of music for all three instruments, and are comprised of pitch genes and duration genes. After introducing the ‘environment’ to the listener, the process starts with the creation of a random generation of individuals using random combinations of the genes available in the environment. Next, the algorithm scores each of these individuals using an evaluation function: the fitter the individual is in relation to the environment, the higher its score will be. It then selects the fittest individual out of the whole population and adds it to the score (i.e. this is the individual we listen to, which represents the best individual of its generation). In order to create the next generation, the algorithm will pick some of the fittest musical organisms of the current one to become parents: their genetic code will be randomly combined to create a new generation of individuals. The previous generation is then discarded and a new generation is created from the combination of the codes of the fittest parents available. Each new individual also has a small chance of receiving a random mutation in its genetic code, which may or may not improve its fitness score. Like in the natural world, these small mutations can lead to positive traits that will become dominant throughout the whole species over time. At this point, the algorithm will employ the same principles as before, once again: these individuals will be scored, the fittest one will be added to the score, and the fittest ones will be selected to be parents for the next generation.
This process described above will be repeated multiple times (between 18 and 30 generations for each section). The resulting music is thus comprised of the fittest individuals of each of these consecutive generations. As a result, we can hear how each of these individuals in the score becomes ever closer to that ideal individual as the music progresses. Consecutive measures are always very similar (or sometimes identical) to one another, making it difficult to hear specific individual changes. But the slow evolutionary process is constantly taking place behind the curtains and, over a larger time-scale, the changes become very noticeable – just like in the natural world. By the end of a section’s process, the final fittest individual will have become remarkably fitter in relation to the environment than the very first ones. Once the pre-defined number of generations is reached and the process is over for a section, the algorithm will append a couple more repetitions of the ideal individual to the score so that our ears can directly compare it with the fittest organism that the genetic algorithm managed to come up with.
The very final section of the piece works in a slightly different way than the previous six. It does not start with a random population as before but rather with the fittest individuals of the previous environment’s last generation. But the new environment has once again changed, and this time the ‘fittest’ genes – upon which the organisms are scored – are pure silence instead of notes and chords (that is, the more silences an individual has, the higher its score will be). What we hear is thus an extinction event, with the computer slowly selecting individuals with fewer and fewer sounds in their genes, until the whole population collapses.
methinks it is like a weasel is dedicated to the Neues Klaviertrio Dresden.
-
follow the well-worn path in the grass (2021)
follow the well-worn path in the grass (2021) is a computer-generated composition in which I continue to explore the themes of musical loops and perception of repetition, particularly within a soft and quiet aesthetics. This piece was composed using algorithmic methods and examines how simple linear processes, which are usually evident to the eye when looking at the score, can result in a listening experience that often suggests a far richer and more complex design.
-
what holds them together (2020)
what holds them together (2020) is a piece written for portative organ, a small pipe organ that was particularly popular in the period ranging from the High Middle Ages until the Renaissance. The portative organ is played with a single hand on a keyboard while the other controls the bellows that supply the airflow for its operation. This piece is written for Ryszard Lubieniecki, who commissioned it as part of a project whose aim is to expand the new music repertoire of this instrument. I wrote this piece with Lubieniecki’s own portative organ in mind, as individual instruments can have unique characteristics, including pitch range, tuning, and bellows capacity.
The first question I wanted to address when approaching this composition was what type of musical material I would use. The portative organ I wrote for uses Pythagorean tuning, with A4 tuned at 494 Hz (about a whole tone above 440 Hz). The pitch range of this instrument is B3–A5, but it does not have a key for G#5. At somewhat soft dynamics, the instrument can start to detune, and at extremely soft dynamics, the timbre becomes very unstable and the detuning very pronounced. The instrument must also be allowed to ‘breathe’ reasonably often so that the bellows can be refilled with air. These unique characteristics of the instrument posed a substantial challenge to me, given the type of material I tend to work with.
My approach to this piece was to incorporate these instrumental idiosyncrasies as much as I could into the material itself. In terms of pitch, I decided to work solely with diatonic clusters, and thus the main parameters I worked with were cluster spread and keyboard position, as opposed to working with pitches per se. This allows for a very physical performance by the player, enabling them to use fists or parts of their hands to depress multiple keys at once. The diatonic nature of this material further emphasises this physicality since the ‘white’ keys20 are of easier access for palm depression. Other than incorporating these performative aspects and this particular instrument’s sonority in this piece, I also decided to only use diatonic notes as a way of creating a dialogue with the history of this instrument and the modal music often written for it.
-
adrift (2020)
In adrift (2020), for two pianos, I use an algorithmic process I metaphorically describe as “crossfaders” to gradually morph between several pre-composed musical. The material played by the first piano gradually dissolves away while the second piano’s material gains more and more notes, and then vice-versa. At each iteration of the process, either a note is removed from the cell fading out or added to the cell fading in. The process also has a very low chance of repeating a measure without altering either cell, further contributing to the disorientation and uncertainty caused by this music. The overall process thus consists of two simultaneous but contrary subprocesses; when a change between iterations is too subtle to be picked up by our ears, one is often left wondering what has changed from the previous iteration—if anything.
By using two pianos and assigning one layer to each of them, the physical space also becomes a property of the algorithmic process: given that consecutive cells alternate between the two pianos, they are not only fading in and out through time but also shifting across the physical performance space in alternation. Although the two pianos can be considered as sound sources located in two fixed (and separate) points in space, the density of notes played by each instrument is constantly and gradually changing through the algorithmic process. As a result, the ‘spatial presence’ of each layer is slowly changing over time, and so is their combined presence, which is constantly moving back and forth between two points. This effect resembles a continuous stereo panning process, borrowing another term from the electroacoustic studio.
As the title of the composition suggests, my goal was to create a listening experience of being adrift, with the listener being carried around aimlessly by the drift of the algorithmic process.
-
untitled #1 (2020)
Composed with a Volca Modular.
-
and thereafter they shape us (2019)
‘Life imitates art. We shape our tools and thereafter they shape us.’
—J. M. Culkinand thereafter they shape us is a work for solo cello composed in 2019. Its title comes from J.M. Culkin’s essay on medium theory, where he writes: ‘Life imitates art. We shape our tools and thereafter they shape us.’ The idea that the tools we adopt ultimately influence the art we create is central to my practice as a composer who relies on the computer as a fundamental creative tool.
The piece engages with themes that have been central to my recent work, especially repetition and looping. Repetition, by its very nature, lends itself to algorithmic exploration. Here I use the concept of a ‘looping window,’ which shifts slightly forward with each iteration of a loop. This gradual movement reveals musical cells previously unheard while forging new relationships between materials, as the transition from the end to the beginning of each loop becomes unpredictable.
Through these processes, I am particularly interested in how algorithmic structures interact with our capacity to remember musical material and the evolving relationships between its elements.
-
Cartography #12 (2019)
to Ensemble Terrible
Cartography #12 is part of my series of computer-generated works entitled Cartographies. These are all ensemble works which explore how simple strict rules and constraints, coupled with random selections, can be used to generate musical structure. The rules governing each of these pieces are kept as simple as possible, each fitting on a single sheet of paper; but when applied together, these rules can often create complex patterns of sounds. This work also examines how simple linear processes, which are usually evident to the eye when looking at the score, can result in a listening experience that often suggests a far richer and more complex design. In this piece, I also make extensive use of musical loops, which both repeat and emphasise some of these patterns of sounds, leading to a kaleidoscopic sonic experience of constant but slow movement, akin to being adrift. This work is dedicated to the Ensemble Terrible.
-
Ars Combinatoria (2019)
A collision between Charles Mingus and vaporwave.
-
Cartography #11 (2018)
Cartography #11 is part of my series of algorithmic works entitled Cartographies. These are all ensemble works which explore how simple strict rules and constraints, coupled with random selections, can be used to generate musical structure. The rules governing each of these pieces are kept as simple as possible, each fitting on a single sheet of paper; but when applied together, these rules can often create complex patterns of sounds.
-
one by one (2018)
-
Cartography #10 (2018; revised in 2020)
Cartography #10 is part of my series of algorithmic works entitled Cartographies. These are chamber works in which I set out to explore how simple algorithmic rules and constraints, coupled with random selections, can be used to generate musical structure. The rules governing each of these pieces are kept as simple as possible, each fitting on a single sheet of paper. However, when applied together, these rules often create complex patterns of sounds, emergent structures that arise from the shimmering of randomness before slipping away. Similarly to all Cartographies from #8 onwards, this particular piece makes use of loops. These emphasise (but also distort) any pattern of sounds or substructures that may arise, leading to a kaleidoscopic sonic experience of constant but slow movement.
-
B_l__de (2018)
B_l__de is an algorithmic work generated by a computer program using Frédéric Chopin’s Ballade No.1, Op.23 in G minor as input. This program filters out 90% of the original notes and what is then left becomes the score of this composition.
-
Cartography #9 (2018)
Cartography #9 is part of my series of algorithmic works entitled Cartographies. These are all ensemble works which explore how simple strict rules and constraints, coupled with random selections, can be used to generate musical structure. The rules governing each of these pieces are kept as simple as possible, each fitting on a single sheet of paper; but when applied together, these rules can often create complex patterns of sounds.
-
Cartography #8 (2018)
to Ensemble Terrible
Cartography #8 (2018) is one of the pieces that make up my series of chamber works entitled Cartographies. These pieces, written between 2017 and 2020, are all generated by automatic score-based systems written by myself. In these works, I explore how a similar generative system can be used to automatically create compositions that are very aesthetically distinct from one another while using the same techniques for material generation and manipulation.
All these compositions share the same `mental model’ that serves as the basis for the generative system, namely the notion of transformable containers. In the context of these series of works, a container is an algorithmic entity that can enclose any types of musical objects; these include low-level musical objects such as simple parameters (pitch, durations, dynamics, etc.) as well as higher-level musical objects such as more complex musical cells. The unique characteristic of these containers is that the probability of each of their elements is given by the elements’ indices in the container; thus, these probability values are not associated with the elements themselves but rather with their position in a given container. This is a very simple concept but one which led to a substantially different framework than the ones I normally operate with while composing.
In order to change the probability of specific elements occurring in a given piece, one would not focus on the elements themselves but on how they can be shifted inside these containers. Several types of transformations thus become available, such as rotation of elements, mirroring their positions from an axis, discarding an element and shifting all others, etc, whose outcome is solely a change of material balance. By strategically planning what transformations take place when it was possible to control the macro structures of these pieces using only these simple operations. These transformations are thus an intrinsic part of these containers and the sole method for material manipulation and shaping of musical evolution. Although not necessarily aurally perceivable, these containers nevertheless form the fundamental framework upon which I operated as a composer. They are a composer-oriented metaphor whose main purpose was to allow me to operate differently than I usually do, and in the process enable the exploration of new sonic worlds; that is, their focus was to shift how I operate as a composer\textemdash which led to a considerable reformulation of my approach\textemdash rather than to solve a specific computational problem.
Starting with Cartography #8, I also began to make extensive use of another simple mental model in these pieces: shifting looping windows. These looping windows add another layer of compositional operations; first, the system creates a meta-composition which is then fed into another series of algorithms that control the looping aspects of these pieces. Due to their nature, musical repetition and looping are highly suitable for algorithmic investigation. The looping window I employ in this piece encapsulates a certain number of notes and always moves a little bit forward with each new iteration. In the process, it is constantly uncovering new musical elements which had not been exposed to the listener yet while, at the same time, leaving familiar elements behind. It also creates new relationships between distinct musical materials, since the juxtaposition of the elements at the end/beginning of each window becomes unpredictable. I am particularly interested in using these algorithmic processes to engage with our ability to remember material and relationships of materials. In the particular case of Cartography #8, the use of a monophonic texture only augments this sense of disorientation in the listener’s memory. The effect is that of a constant sense of déjà vu: structures that arise from the sequence of measures are less pronounced due to the simplicity of the material and texture and, given the length of the looping window employed, seem fairly static. It is, nevertheless, in constant movement, gradually shifting towards completely new material. It is this friction between our ability to remember, recognise, and relate musical elements that form one of the key aspects of the computational aesthetics explored in my recent music.
While working with these mental models, I have written a Python library entitled Auxjad library whose aim is to extend the popular score generation library Abjad. The latter serves as a Python API for LilyPond, allowing users to create their scores incrementally through code. My library contains auxiliary functions and classes whose aim is to extend Abjad, encapsulating the previously mentioned mental models as specific classes. This allows both me and other composers to operate with these models in a high-level environment.
-
Cartography #7 (2018)
Cartography #7 is part of my series of algorithmic works entitled Cartographies. These are all ensemble works which explore how simple strict rules and constraints, coupled with random selections, can be used to generate musical structure. The rules governing each of these pieces are kept as simple as possible, each fitting on a single sheet of paper; but when applied together, these rules can often create complex patterns of sounds.
-
Cartography #6 (2017)
Cartography #6 is part of my series of algorithmic works entitled Cartographies. These are all ensemble works which explore how simple strict rules and constraints, coupled with random selections, can be used to generate musical structure. The rules governing each of these pieces are kept as simple as possible, each fitting on a single sheet of paper; but when applied together, these rules can often create complex patterns of sounds.
-
Cartography #5 (2017)
Cartography #5 is part of my series of algorithmic works entitled Cartographies. These are all ensemble works which explore how simple strict rules and constraints, coupled with random selections, can be used to generate musical structure. The rules governing each of these pieces are kept as simple as possible, each fitting on a single sheet of paper; but when applied together, these rules can often create complex patterns of sounds.
-
Cartography #4 (2017; revised in 2020)
Cartography #4 is part of my series of algorithmic works entitled Cartographies. These are all ensemble works which explore how simple strict rules and constraints, coupled with random selections, can be used to generate musical structure. The rules governing each of these pieces are kept as simple as possible, each fitting on a single sheet of paper; but when applied together, these rules can often create complex patterns of sounds.
-
Cartography #3 (2017)
to Luciano Morais
Cartography #3 is part of my series of algorithmic works entitled Cartographies. These are all ensemble works which explore how simple strict rules and constraints, coupled with random selections, can be used to generate musical structure. The rules governing each of these pieces are kept as simple as possible, each fitting on a single sheet of paper; but when applied together, these rules can often create complex patterns of sounds.
-
Cartography #2 (2017)
Cartography #2 is part of my series of algorithmic works entitled Cartographies. These are all ensemble works which explore how simple strict rules and constraints, coupled with random selections, can be used to generate musical structure. The rules governing each of these pieces are kept as simple as possible, each fitting on a single sheet of paper; but when applied together, these rules can often create complex patterns of sounds.
-
Cartography #1 (2017)
Cartography #1 is part of my series of algorithmic works entitled Cartographies. These are all ensemble works which explore how simple strict rules and constraints, coupled with random selections, can be used to generate musical structure. The rules governing each of these pieces are kept as simple as possible, each fitting on a single sheet of paper; but when applied together, these rules can often create complex patterns of sounds.
-
Jamais Vu (2017)
to Matthias Lorenz
Jamais Vu is an algorithmic composition for solo cello, dedicated to Matthias Lorenz, and created using a computer program. Its score exists in infinitely many versions as each execution of this program rewrites the music, generating a new unique score. Thus, every little detail in every version of this work has been logically created according to the composer’s strict rules and yet these details are all unforeseen, making two scores generated by the same program look alike but never be the same.
In his The Psychology of Déjà Vu: Have I been here before?, Vernon M. Neppe defines jamais vu (French for ‘never seen’) as ‘[a]ny subjectively inappropriate impression of non-familiarity of the present despite numerous past exposures.’ Likewise, even though the listener of this work may develop a sense of intimacy with this music, every new version will invariably create a sense of non-familiarity.
-
Time Is My Canvas (2016)
-
Asterism (2016)
Asterism, for solo accordion and live electronics, is a short composition created using algorithmic methods, as all of my recent instrumental work. In this piece, the musical materials are transformed, transposed, enlarged and rotated using specific algorithmic rules. Silences are used to punctuate the strict structure which emerge from these rules.
About the chosen title, the word asterism has two meanings. The first comes from astronomy: asterism is an apparent pattern of stars in the sky that can be observed from our point of view but which in reality may be separated by an extraordinary distance from each other. The second meaning comes from typography: asterism is an archaic symbol which was used to indicate minor breaks in a text (it looked like three asterisks put together in a triangular shape). It’s possible to relate these concepts to the segmented nature of this composition (made out of short cells separated apart with breaks, and musical phrases having long silences between them) as well as with the structural patterns that emerge from the algorithmic rules.
-
Mosaics (2016)
Mosaics is a computer-aided composition for solo harp which consists of 256 individual fragments. Each fragment has been individually generated by a computer program, and while their layout might have been slightly adjusted to avoid notation issues, the musical content of each individual “mosaic” has remained intact.
-
Zugzwang (2016)
Zugzwang (2016) is a generative electroacoustic composition written in Pure Data. This work makes use of 64 sinusoidal oscillators and is based on a simple rotational principle: when the algorithm determines that a frequency change should take place, if the last oscillator to change was the n-th then the new frequency will be played by the (n+1)-st oscillator. This means that any selected frequency will remain sounding until 63 frequency changes have happened, at which point the oscillator playing the frequency in question will be selected for the next change.
The frequencies selected by the algorithm, as well as the volume and position in the stereo space, are randomly selected for each change event. A pre-defined envelope controls the allowed frequency range at each moment of the composition and is formed by two expansions and contractions.
This composition can be divided into seven phases, all of which have different methods for selecting the moments of frequency changes. Similarly to the frequencies themselves, the time between two events is random, but the range of possible time deltas follows fixed processes. For instance, in the very start of the composition the range of the possible time deltas is 15 to 20 seconds, but at the end of this first phase the deltas available are between 30 and 100 milliseconds. Other types phases increase and decrease the deltas using other defined values; other phases force the deltas to be 0 (that is, changing n oscillators at a same moment) or also force n oscillators to change at a fixed delay between themselves.
The microscopic result is of course indeterminate, but by carefully controlling these processes the form of the composition is very clearly defined.
-
On the Fabric of Time (2016)
-
Ricercar (2016)
to Monika Charkowska
-
aus Klang (2016)
aus Klang is an algorithmic composition for 15 instruments. It is a generative work which rewrites itself for every performance: its score is generated by a computer program, which rigorously follows the composer’s structural ideas and rules, but also makes small choices by itself via the use of randomly generated numbers (that is, when given a choice of several possible outcomes, the computer chooses an option randomly). Thus, every little detail in this work is logical within the proposed rules and yet these details are all unforeseen, making two scores generated by the same program look alike but never be the same.
-
Rosetta (2016)
-
Beyond the Limit of Fertile Land... (2016)
When composing this piece, I used de Bruijn sequences, which are sequences with an alphabet of size k in which every combination of n elements of this alphabet appears exactly just once, and no combinations are missing. E.g. the sequence 001021122(0) contains every combination possible of two numbers exactly once, i.e. 00, 01, 10, 02, 21, 12, 22, 20. A de Bruijn sequence is cyclic, and can be notated in two ways: the last n-1 elements can be repetitions of the first n-1, or alternatively ommited. I opted for the first option (explicit cycle instead of implicit) as, otherwise, not all combinations are present (e.g. in the example above, the string “20” would be missing, or rather left implicit).
The sequences used are:
- alphabet k=12, string length n=3 for pitches
- alphabet k=12, string length n=3 for durations (but reverse, i.e. [11, 11, …, 0, 0])
- alphabet k=6, string length n=3 for dynamics
- alphabet k=3, string length n=3 for registers
Pitches and duration sequences appear only one single time each, plus the first two elements of the next cycle. Dynamics sequence appears 8 times, plus the first two elements. Sequence of pitch registers appears 64 times, plus the first two elements.
-
Piano Sonata (2016)
Piano Sonata is an algorithmic composition which rewrites itself for every performance: its score is generated by a computer program, which rigorously follows the composer’s structural ideas and rules, but also makes small decisions by itself via the use of randomly generated numbers. Thus, every little detail in this work is follows logical principles but yet are unforeseen, making two scores generated by the same program look alike but never be the same.
Composed in 2016, though first sketches date back to 2013.
-
You Asked For It! (2015)
You Asked For It! is an algorithmic composition for piano, electric guitar and double bass, composed in Pure Data. After generating a musical material according to the composer’s rules, the computer then repeats this pattern over and over again, but at each repetition it will “trim out” a small piece of the previous pattern, so that the resulting one is always shrinking. The process finishes when the very last note has been trimmed out.
-
impulse (2015)
impulse is a piece for 13 soloists written specially for this concert. This is a semi-algorithmic composition: although its structure has been created with the assistence of a computer, some of the compositional decisions have been left to the discretion of the composer. The impulses refered in the title can be found in two different layers: in each instance of the softer musical layer, one instrument is selected by the computer as a “guide”, and each of his notes acts as a small impulse, cueing another instrument. The second use of impulses can be found in the louder layer, which becomes more and more proiminent as the music progresses. It is constituted of larger musical gestures which are themselves impulses, moving forwards the musical process.
-
O Ritual Da Sombra (2015)
-
2D Virtual Acousmonium (2015)
The generatuive sound installation 2D Virtual Acousmonium uses fiducial markers and an overhead webcam to track the position of listeners while outputting sounds via wireless headphones. Coupled with binaural processes, these techniques allow the listeners to dynamically interact with virtual sounds around them.
-
Don't Mind if I Do! (2015)
-
Deviation (2015)
Deviation is an algorithmic piece for four cellos written in 2015 and was generated using a programming language called Pure Data. The structure of this piece is created by the superimposition of several simple processes. The main process controls how the pizzicato melodies get less steep as time passes, until they are so flat that they become a series of repeated notes in the middle register. Another process adds some structural “noise” to the piece (in the pitch domain as well as in the time domain), making the descending melodies less recognizable and their patterns less audible. It is exactly this last process that gives title to the piece, as the imposed noise forces the melodies to deviate from any expected regularity.
-
Ascension (2014)
Ascension (2014) is a 4-channel electroacoustic composition written in Pure Data. This six-minute piece was created using generative methods and random procedures, which ensures that each performance of this work is unique: though its boundaries are strictly defined, its micro-structure (individual frequencies, amplitudes, stereo positions) is always different, being randomly selected according to pre-defined stochastic rules and thus always filling those boundaries in unique ways. The sound is produced by six sinusoidal oscillators; at the start, they produce only constant frequencies, but as the piece progresses they start shifting more and more upwards, producing an auditory illusion of constant ascension.
-
Metamorphosis (2014)
-
flux (2014)
to Artur Cimirro
-
Hands on a system (2014)
Imagine this piano is not an instrument. The hands on the system are not the ones of the player. What if they can’t control the keys any longer?
-
Three (2014)
-
Four (2014)
In memoriam Mário Ficarelli
Four is an algorithmic composition for string quartet which rewrites itself for every performance: its score is generated by a computer program, which rigorously follows the composer’s structural ideas and rules, but also makes small decisions by itself via the use of randomly generated numbers. Thus, every little detail in this work is logical and yet unforeseen, making two scores generated by the same program look alike but never be the same. This piece is written in memory of Mário Ficarelli.
-
Palimpsest (2014)
A palimpsest is a manuscript page, either from a scroll or a book, from which the text has been either scraped or washed off so that the page can be reused for another document. In a similar way, the composition Palimpsest for chamber orchestra rewrites itself for every performance: its score is generated by a computer program, which rigorously follows the composer’s structural ideas and rules, but also makes small decisions by itself via the use of randomly generated numbers. Thus, every little detail in this work is logical and yet unforeseen, making two scores generated by the same program look alike but never be the same.
-
The Arrow of Time (2014; revised in 2025)
The Arrow of Time is an electroacoustic piece for 8-channels created with generative methods in Pure Data. As sources of sound, it uses eight recordings of the ticking of eight different clocks (labelled as clocks A–H in this text). The sound of each clock will always be reproduced by a same speaker.
The structure of the piece has five phases, labelled as opening, shift, chaos, transition and ending:
• opening: the piece start with clock A ticking at 60bpm, while clocks B–H will start playing one by one, also at a rate of 60 bpm, but in different phases than clock A. When this process is finished, a stable and constant rhythmic cell will have been generated. • shift: one by one, clocks B-H will slowly and smoothly change their bpm speed to another value (randomly generated). Once this final value is reached, a clock will remain ticking constant in this new speed. • chaos: one by one, clocks B–H drop their constant beat in favour of a completely random and variable speed within a certain range (that is, after each tick a new random speed is selected), so they won’t have a steady beat as before. • transition: slowly and one by one, clocks B–H will start changing their speed back to 60 bpm (but out of phase with clock A). • ending: once all clocks are at 60 bpm once again, one by one clocks B–H will stop to tick, leaving only clock A in the end
Notice that clock A never changes its bpm value nor its phase, and thus remains as the reference throughout the piece.
This piece explores concepts such as entropy and the arrow of time. Entropy dictates that the level of disorder of a closed system can only grow in time, which in turn is what gives directionality to time, creating the so-called arrow of time. In this present work, the system tends towards an extremely chaotic middle section, when it suddenly reverts its direction, as if going back in time, and symmetrically returns to its initial state (at which points the work could, at least in principle, start over and over again).
This work also aims to study how a listener understands and percepts rhythms and patterns. For instance, the simultaneous use of acceleration and deceleration causes an unsettling effect (most music deals with either one or another at a given time), a sense of confusing about the tempo. It also shows that, in a stable rhythmical situation, any slight change of the expected pattern – even if minimal! – will result in an accents (at least perceptionally speaking). At the slightest apparent constancy, our mind is immediately tricked into expecting stability.
-
The Wanderer's Clarinet (2014)
-
Tête-à-Tête (2014)
-
Telomere (2013)
The fantasy to wrest something from the gods, as their divine eternal youth, their immortality, something of their felicitousness, was accompanying us since the dawn of mankind and has been materialized in Tantalus’ robbery of nectar and ambrosia or in the alchemist search for the philosophers’ stone, also necessary to produce a mythical potion, which was supposed to grant the drinker eternal life and youth. Youth, immortality and all life’s joy until ceasing to strive were also the devil’s promises to Goethe’s doctor Faust, sadly lasting exactly only until he says: “Stay a while, you are so beautiful!” (“Verweile doch! du bist so schön!”), according to their pact. All these attempts are being constantly smashed by our human nature with its limitations. Telomeres, the structural elements of the DNA protecting our chromosomes, and therefore our genetic information, are irreparably shortened with each cell division, until a critical minimum when the cell can no longer divide further more, so that life is not possible anymore: this loss of information is (so far) the inevitable reason of our mortality.
—Monika Charkowska
-
Composition for Nine Sounds (2013)
Composition for Nine Sounds is an algorithmic work for solo percussion. This work requires nine instruments, which are to be chosen by the player, respecting the following rules:
- The instruments should be divided into two groups: group A and group B
- Group A should contain of five instruments
- Group B should contain of four instruments
- Each group should contain instruments from two families at most (skin, metal, wood, glass, etc.)
- A same family cannot be used both groups
- The instruments of each group should be organized from low to high sounding.
The more distinct are the two groups of instruments, the better is the musical result.
-
Oiseaux Électroniques (2013)
Oiseaux Électroniques is an electroacoustic work for two channels based on a recording of the birdsong of the wirapu’ru (Musician Wren), a typical bird of the Brazilian rainforest whose songs have mythical significance for the natives. The whole work consists of a two minutes soundscape, which is completely based on this recording, upon which songs of electronic birds are created. Due to its fractal nature, every single element of this work – be it micro or macro, be it sonic or structural – is based on the birdsong itself; threfore the music is generated not from the birdsong, but by it.
-
noir (2013)
noir is a piece written for two percussionists. It requires a vibraphone and four wood blocks of different sizes.
-
Tetragon (2013)
Tetragon is a fixed media electroacoustic composition, originally written for 4 channels. That version has now been lost, and only a stereo reduction exists.
-
On the Origin of Pitches (2012)
My interest in algorithmic music started in 2011–2012, specifically when I began working on my composition On the Origin of Pitches (2012) for solo vibraphone. Heavily influenced by the ideas of John Cage and Brian Eno, I aimed to create an instrumental open-work whose content would completely change at each and every performance. The idea of music that rewrites itself at every hearing was immensely attractive to me, especially since it also seemed to support the Cagean notion of silencing one’s ego through the use of indeterminate procedures, a notion I was fascinated with at the time. Since On the Origin of Pitches is an algorithmic open-work, it does not exist as a single score but can instead be understood as the solution space of a given system: that is, it encompasses all possible musical realisations satisfying the composition’s system of algorithmic constraints. To put it simply, every execution of those computer programs would generate a completely new score with music that had never been heard before. This is an idea I continued to explore and develop up until late 2017.
At that time, I began to support the notion that one cannot entirely separate technology from aesthetics in the context of algorithmic art. I promptly realised that algorithms were not mere tools for quick experimentation, as they also suggested aesthetic routes to be taken. I thoroughly embraced the generative and repetitive aesthetics of the pieces created with those methods and started exploring how algorithms help me compose new music that could not have been thought of by non-algorithmic means.
-
Écoutez, s'il vous plaît! (2ème version) (2012)
Écoutez, s’il vous plaît! (2ème version) was my second attempt at strict total serialism (following the first version with identical title). In this composition, I attempted to not only control pitch and durations separately, but to ensure two more criteria: 1) that all transpositions of the prime and inverted dodecaphonic series appear exactly once, and 2) that every pitch-class would sound for the exact same amount of total time.
-
Cycles (2012)
Cycles (2012) is an indeterminate composition for organ. The performer may choose their own path through the score, which is notated with musical fragments connected via arrows. The paths may reach the initial fragment an indeterminate amount of times, leading to as many cyclic waves of music as the performer wishes to play.
-
Aphorisms (2012)
-
Écoutez, s'il vous plaît! (1ère version) (2012)
Écoutez, s’il vous plaît! (1ère version) was my first attempt at strict total serialism. In this composition, I attempted to not only control pitch and durations separately, but to ensure two more criteria: 1) that all transpositions of the prime and inverted dodecaphonic series appear exactly once, and 2) that every pitch-class would sound for the exact same amount of total time.
-
Kaleidoscope (2011)
Kaleidoscope is a composition written in 2011 for twelve solo players, based on the instrumentation of the Nieuw Ensemble from Amsterdam. The work consists of three movements, all of which uses serial methods to organize the six tone row formed by my own initials (GDSAFH). Each one of the movements are constructed by unique serial procedures, but they are still solidly connected by the main tone row. The music is strictly harmonic and there is a strong interrelationship between all the chords that can be heard at any specific moment. The variation of these chords, one after the other, works as a kaleidoscope: after a short spin, the colour and the texture of the music might change, but yet, wherever one looks, there will be the familiar elements that form the structural basis of the work.
-
Æther (2011)