Improvisation in the Philippine Kulintang:

Improvisation in the Philippine Kulintang:
An Analysis on Creativity in the Process of Imitation
Hideaki Onishi
Assistant Professor, Yong Siew Toh Conservatory of Music
National University of Singapore
Pamela Costes-Onishi
Lecturer, Center for American Education, Singapore
(American University Transfer Program)
Introduction
Usopay Cadar once remarked that improvisation is tantamount to the constitution of
kulintang,i the gong and drum ensemble music practiced primarily in the Southern Islamic
region of the Philippines:
To me, the great Maguindanaon kulintang music evolved under a set of fundamental rules
which, for our purposes, we will call a Constitution. This Constitution represents a big
chunk of what ethnomusicologists are trying to decipher. Although no one knows its
entirety yet, we do know that the Constitution of kulintang music mandates that it is free
and improvisatory in nature (email in 1999, quoted in Costes 2005: 426).
Page 1 of 38
Ethnomusicologists have studied kulintang in an attempt to decipher this “constitution”
by examining, for example, the variations practiced among the Maranao (Cadar and Garfias
1996); the comparison of the sinulog genres in two styles of the Maguindanaon, namely
kamamatuan (old) and kangungudan (new) (Posner 1980 and 1996); the roles of the drone
instruments, which are the gandingan and agung (Terada 1983 and 1996; Scholz 1982 and
1996); and the use of binalig as a generative concept in order to understand the creativity,
innovation, and transformation in the kulintang (Benitez 2005). Although these are invaluable
contributions to kulintang scholarship, the principles of improvisation remain elusive as they
were either analyzed statistically or the transcriptions tend to fix the possible directions that
could be explored in a given pattern. This is specifically true concerning the kulintang as melodic
instrument. The transcriptions were still insufficient to direct a kulintang learner to the principles
of actual creativity in the instrument and, more importantly, an application of the unlocked
improvisational idioms has not been attempted. The applicability of the analysis is then left
lacking.
A call for the study from a different perspective may be in order. In this study, we try to
delve deeper into the language of kulintang and examine its idioms by taking an interdisciplinary
approach. The above-mentioned studies on the kulintang instruments have been done primarily
from the ethnomusicological standpoint, but music theory has a great potential to offer new
insights into it. As learners of the tradition, our aim is also to apply in our own performance
practice the improvisational idioms of the kulintang tradition, veering away from the current
learning process of memorization of patterns in a fixed sequence and style.ii
This study is based on the conversations and lessons we had with two master musicians
Kanapia Kalanduyan and Aga Mayo Butocan. We have incorporated analyses of specific music
Page 2 of 38
excerpts that would support the conclusions on kulintang improvisation based on these
conversations, but the main focus of the analysis is three different performances of the tagunggo,
specifically the kulintang part and Maguindanaon style as rendered by the master musician
Danongan Kalanduyan recorded within the span of 10 years. The time period allowed us to
investigate changes in the performance styles of an individual musician and the different
occasions for which the recordings were made provided solid contextual bases on the factors that
could influence creativity in kulintang. We will present an application of our theory to a personal
version of the tagunggo, the only kulintang genre originally used for rituals.
Notes on the Transcription and Notation
Kulintang has been orally transmitted. Kulintang gong sets are not manufactured in
uniform tuning and each set has a similar but slightly (or sometimes significant) different tuning
from all others. As Butocan said, “no two sets of kulintang have the same row of pitches (1987:
19).” Benitez also admits the variety and gives two examples of tuning: C, Db, F, G, Ab, C, D,
and E for gongs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, respectively; and C, D, F, G, A, C, D, and E (2005:
52).iii Cadar and Garfias insist, though, that there is a preferred pattern of intervals in the
kulintang that results in “some uniformity of contour when the same melody is heard on
differently tuned sets (1996: 108). They also mention how both the Maguindanaons and
Maranaos prefer the pelogiv type of tuning even when playing Western instruments such as the
piano and harmonica (ibid.). Danongan Kalanduyan uses two kulintang sets for the three
recordings discussed in the present study: the set for the 1994 recording is tuned approximately
to Bb, C, Eb, F, Gb, Ab, Bb, and C; and the 2003 and 2004 recordings to Bb, C, Eb, F, Gb, Bb,
Cb, and Db (Example 1):
Page 3 of 38
Example 1: The Approximate Tunings of the Two Kulintang Sets
Used by Danongan Kalanduyan
Set 1 (1994)
Set 2 (2003 and 2004)
Western staff notation has been widely applied in the transcription of ethnomusicological
studies, including that of kulintang. It is straightforward and easy for the Western-trained
scholars and musicians to read. However, there are problems concerning the pitch and rhythm
aspects in applying this system of notation to non-Western music. Staff notation was originally
meant for tonal/diatonic music, and even within Western music it has some difficulty in handling
post-tonal chromatic music with full of accidentals. Moreover, when applied to music whose
scale has less than seven notes per octave, it may give out the impression that a note is skipped
when in fact two adjacent notes are played. The use of key signature is also misleading since it
can give a false impression that the music is in a certain functional tonality in the Western sense.v
Example 2 shows Tagunggo, transcribed by Butocan herself:
Example 2: Tagunggo (transcribed by Aga Mayo Butocan)
Page 4 of 38
As for the rhythm, the mensural system can determine the proportionate relationship among
notes precisely, although the sense of meter and that of downbeat or, as Benitez has put it, “point
of reference (2005: 9, 56)” may be different. Applying the Western metric system uncritically
may change the true feeling of the music being transcribed.
Cipher Notationvi was devised for the kulintang by Aga Mayo Butocan in the 1980s.
According to her, this type of teaching through notation came about because she had to teach the
students at the University of the Philippines no less than twelve pieces in a school year, and the
oral method was not very effective in accomplishing this goal (personal interview, 21 November
2009). The new setting, where students no longer had the benefit of hearing kulintang played day
and night and for many years, required a different approach in transmission. The downside of
using written notation for kulintang is, however, that students now failed to grasp the
Page 5 of 38
improvisatory essence of the tradition. Learning was reduced to the memorization of pieces
exactly as performed by other kulintang musicians, thus losing the sense of creativity in the
process of imitation that is central to the understanding of this particular musical culture.
In this study, we will use our own notational devise, which is a combination of cipher
notation and Western staff notation. We have adopted Western staff notation so that the lowest
gong 1 is placed on line 1, gong 2 in space 1, gong 3 on space 2 and so forth with the highest
gong 8 in space 4. No clef or time signature is applied. In addition, numbers 1 through 8 replace
the note head and are used for the corresponding gongs. The rhythmic notation of the Western
system has been applied without change because of its preciseness, except different feelings of
kulintang may not be conveyable this way. In the case of the three tagunggo recordings, we have
interpreted two square grids in cipher notation as forming one beat and an eight-grid unit as one
cycle separated from adjacent ones with bar lines. This notational system may prove applicable
to transcription of other musical cultures such as Indonesian gamelan.
With regards to showing which hand plays a gong, cipher notation is straightforward as it
assigns the top row to the right hand and the bottom to the left. It would not cause any problem
as far as it is used in practicing the instrument. A different kind of challenge in transcribing
kulintang music is how to notate left and right hands. The difficulty lies in the fact that melodic
notes, simultaneous strokes, and other accompaniment strokes are played in both hands (although
most melodic notes are played with the right and the rest with the left). Moreover, the choice of
hand may differ from performer to performer and there is now way to know it from the sound
recording. A more elaborate system may be invented in the future, but for the time being we
have transcribed kulintang music that are in cipher notation and recordings in the following way:
(1) melodic notes are always stemmed upwards, regardless of the hand to play with; (2) melodic
Page 6 of 38
notes played with the left hand are also stemmed downwards; and (3) doublings and underlying
rhythmic patterns played with the left hand are stemmed downwards.vii Example 3 is the same
tagunggo, now transcribed in the new notational system:
Example 3: The Same Tagunggo in Our Notational System
(Transcribed by Hideaki Onishi)
In choosing the system of notation to be applied in this study, we are aware that to a certain
extent, the feeling or essence of improvised music is lost when written down. It is important to
keep in mind that the transcribed music is for studying it and never meant to be read for actual
performance.
The Philippine Kulintang: A Brief Introduction
The word kulintang refers to the main melodic instrument of the five-piece ensemble, as
well as to the music played by this ensemble. Among the indigenous traditions of the
Philippines, kulintang is by far the most well received and well known outside of the islands.
This is due perhaps to its affinity to the Indonesian gamelan, which played a great role in
Page 7 of 38
introducing the sounds of Southeast Asian gongs and drums to the West. But aside from some
similarities in the bronze instruments, the bossed row of gongs and hanging gongs, musically in
particular, the Philippine kulintang follows different aesthetic principles from that of the larger
gamelan ensemble.
Most kulintang scholars consider this largely Islamic tradition to be the Philippines’ clear
connection to the shared bronze gong traditions of Southeast Asia (Hood, not dated; Maceda
1994 and 1998; Costes 2005).viii But although the tradition is widespread in the southern
Philippines, the kulintang’s musical style is pre-Islamic and indigenous (Cadar 1996; Maceda
1998; Costes 2005).ix
The kulintang as an instrument is a row of eight graduated, bossed gongs laid
horizontally on a wooden rack and suspended on strings. It is the main melodic instrument of the
kulintang ensemble, which consists of other instruments: the hanging gongs agung and
gandingan that supports the rhythmic mode through variations and serves as secondary melody
to the kulintang, respectively; and the time keepers babandil and dabakan that keep the rhythmic
cycle of the music at a steady pace (Figure 1):
Figure 1. The Instruments in the Kulintang Ensemble (cited from
http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com.libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/subscriber/popup_fig/img/grove/music
/F010328)
Page 8 of 38
Despite of more than three hundred years of Western domination in the Philippines, the
kulintang tradition flourished in the Muslim south of the country, practiced widely in the region
of Mindanao (shown in Figure 2) and Sulu (Maceda 1998). The two most well known styles are
Page 9 of 38
the Maranao and Maguindanaon.x The common functions of the kulintang are for entertainment,
social interaction, communication, and healing ceremonies. Kulintang musicians are said to
engage in the propagation of the tradition not to earn a living but to earn respect, prestige and
recognition in the society (Kalanduyan 1984, 1996):
Figure 2: Mindanao Island, the Philippines (cited from http://www.kipas.nl/Instruments/Gandang.htm)
Review of Relevant Studies on the Improvisation in Kulintang
Several studies were completed and published on the creativity and improvisation in the
kulintang, agung, and gandingan. The most notable are those of Posner (1980 and 1996), Scholz
(1982 and 1996), Terada (1983 and 1996), Cadar and Garfias (1996), and Benitez (2005). All
studies, with the exception of Cadar and Garfias which focused on the Maranao kulintang, were
attempts on a more in-depth analysis of the individual parts of the ensemble as contrasted by the
Page 10 of 38
pioneering work of Jose Maceda (1963) on the music of the Maguindanaon people. Scholz,
Terada, and Posner also investigated the contrasting kamamatuan (old) and kangungudan (new)
styles and their analyses were based on the playing style of the master musician Danongan
Kalanduyan. Benitez and Terada used cipher notation in their transcriptions, while Scholz
applied a modified Western notation. Posner (1996) did not clearly show her analysis but
presented them in a summary.
Posner (1980, 1996) used statistical methodology in order to determine common and
distinguishing elements between the two styles. Her approach aimed to be quantifiably objective
and the author herself admitted to the many limitations of her study. She maintained that
discriminant analysis was useful in analyzing critical variables in studying music based on
improvisation. However, a lot of the musical aspect was lost in this type of analysis and in the
end the results served only to confuse rather than illuminate the problem of distinguishing what
was sinulog a kamamatuan and sinulog a kangungudan. The statistical probabilities without
regard to the context turned out too abstract for a kulintang learner to absorb and be able to apply
in his/her own personal performance style.
Scholz (1996) analyzed the role of agung in reinforcing the rhythmic mode of a given
kulintang genre. His analysis proved useful to the extent that a learner of the instrument was
made aware of the limitations and freedom involved in varying the basic rhythm. He drew
attention to the important points where the basic or lower agung should fall and to the function of
the higher pitched pair to ornament. The analysis also tried to show the relationship of agung to
other rhythmic accompanying instruments to emphasize his point. He consistently pointed to the
“grammar” of improvisation necessary for the sinulog a kamamatuan under investigation,
showing different variations possible in relation to the kulintang melody. He incorporated some
Page 11 of 38
statistical analysis much like Posner, but not excessively, and most arguments are backed with
notated examples. Scholz also argued against Maceda’s (1963, 1986) point regarding the
function of the agung in the ensemble, emphasizing its active role in reinforcing the rhythmic
mode as opposed to merely providing a drone background. Although the study was not focused
on the kulintang part, the correlation of parts did not really provide information as to the
improvisations possible on the main melody. The author tended to express that the kulintang as
the leader of the ensemble followed a more or less fixed sequential patterns that would provide
landmarks or clues to other instruments as to the direction of the entire music.
Terada’s (1983, 1996) analysis of the gandingan provides more insights into the various
possibilities a performer can do within the framework of melodic “building blocks” and rhythmic
mode. In most cases, the relationship to the other instrumental parts is made clear and the
emphasis on the variations based on rhythmic modes seems to lessen the involvement of the
kulintang part within the ensemble. The transcriptions of Kalanduyan’s playing techniques also
framed the study within one performer’s musical vocabulary; nevertheless, the deduction of
styles pertinent to the modes provided ideas useful to the creativity in the learner. Like Scholz
(1996), Terada also argued against Maceda’s conclusion that the gandingan merely colors the
sound of the ensemble, emphasizing its active role in both the melodic and rhythmic
reinforcement of a given mode.
Benitez (2005) utilized the syntagmatic-paradigmatic framework and the idea of
constraints in her analysis of the kulintang. In showing what she called the options in a kulintang
performance, Benitez used “the idea of modules which consist of recurring musical phrases, two
or four beats in length (8).” She treated these modules as patterns integrative of melody and
rhythm that occupy slots in a musical sequence. Within each module are melodically and
Page 12 of 38
rhythmically variagated yet related musical phrases, which she refers to as the “options”
available to a kulintang player.
The studies that specifically address the kulintang, which is the main melodic instrument
of the ensemble, seem to be lacking in several respects. First, Posner’s statistical analysis did not
really point clearly to the essential tools needed for a kulintang learner that would effectively
assist in the creativity in the instrument. Second, Benitez’s transcriptions, although sampled from
over 300 musical examples, only outlined the different “options” that a player can do in the
patterns. These options appear to be fixed and something a player can just patch in or connect
together when playing the instrument. The analysis of beats based on Western perception also
deemphasized the rhythmic cycle that we believe to be central to any improvisation in kulintang.
As for Scholz and Terada, although their analyses clearly showed the different possibilities and
building blocks an agung and gandingan players could explore, their conclusions tend to relegate
a fixed notion of sequential patterns in the kulintang part. Scholz’s contention that this limited
license to variate on the kulintang could be due to its role as overall ensemble leader requires
more investigation.
The studies revealed that similar to the other accompanying instruments there could be a
possibility that the kulintang’s patterns could also be drawn from and affected by the important
rhythmic mode that these patterns serve to reinforce. For although the kulintang appears to serve
as the salient melodic line because of its eight pitches and their permutations, the analyses
presented in this study would hint to its more rhythmic nature or tight adherence to the rhythmic
mode of a given performance.
Conversations on Kulintang Improvisation with Two Master Musicians
Page 13 of 38
Our lessons with master musicians Kanapia Kalanduyan and Aga Mayo Butocan during
our visit to the Philippines in October and November 2009 revealed interesting insights on the
native performers’ view on creativity in the kulintang instruments. In our conversations and
lessons with Kanapia and Aga Mayo, the following points on improvisation on the kulintang and
in the ensemble came up: (1) significance of the rhythmic cycle, (2) adherence of the melodic
contour to this rhythmic cycle, (3) value of imitation in the creation of kulintang patterns, and (4)
communication between instruments through replication of improvised rhythms.
Significance of the Rhythmic Cycle. The centrality of the rhythmic mode in each
kulintang genre such as duyug, binalig, sinulog, tidtu, and tagunggo has been emphasized by all
research to date in the analysis of its music (Maceda 1963; Scholz 1996; Terada 1996; Benitez
2005). These analyses showed how there are specific beats (defined in the Western sense) within
a cycle of usually four or eight beats that are more emphasized than others. These points of
emphasis are where certain gongs would be played or doubled, and where the resolution in the
cycle would fall. The cycle can also be subdivided into smaller units which are defined by the
length of phrases played in the kulintang melodic instrument.xi
Kanapia Kalanduyan reiterated to us that all the parts in a given kulintang music should
be in the same “tempo,” for which further probing proved that he was actually referring to the
rhythmic mode, defined in this study to include the cycle and the subdivisions within the cycle
marked by points of emphases. When asked what should be the basis for an ensemble to be
considered having a tight rhythm, Kanapia replied by having Pamela play a sinulog kamamatuan
rhythm on the dabakan while he played a pattern in the kulintang (see Example 4 below). This
Page 14 of 38
explanation confirms the basic four-beat phrase of the sinulog as analyzed by Benitez (2005:26)
in which variations can extend the phrase lengths into eight “beats”:
Example 4: Sinulog Kamamatuan
It is important to point out that the way Kanapia counted the “beats” revealed that among
the Maguindanaons, the downbeat actually comes at the end, not beginning, of one full cycle on
the babandil (time keeper) and the dabakan (drum), instruments that keep the rhythmic cycle
steady all throughout the music. This is significant because the point of emphasis is actually just
at the end of the cycle and not on beats 1 and 4 or beats 1 and 3 as perceived by Benitez (2005)
and Scholz (1996), respectively. We believe that defining the concept of “beat” in the native
perception is a key to the understanding of improvisation on the kulintang and its accompanying
instruments. Melodic contours in the kulintang part adhere to this point of emphasis at the end of
cycles, which should be heard as one complete musical statement in the babandil and the
dabakan parts.
Page 15 of 38
Adherence of the Melodic Contour to the Rhythmic Cycle. In this particular example
of sinulog kamamatuan, it appears that melodic contours in the kulintang are marked by
conclusive breath marks as if speaking.xii The phrases can either be one or two full cycles.
Extension of patterns, as one of the techniques of variation mentioned by Aga Mayo, and its
contour thus complete two cycles. In the demonstration by Kanapia, Hideaki played the agung
pattern, first adhering to one cycle then extending to two cycles, to which Kanapia exclaimed,
“Tignan mo nakuha yung tempo!” (“See, we all got the proper tempo [cycle]!”). This short
demonstration in the agung shows that even in the accompanying instruments improvisations
through extensions span two full cycles in the sinulog kamamatuan.
This adherence to the cycle can also be heard in the more modern sinulog kangungudan.
To further clarify what is the perceived tightness in kulintang ensemble playing, Kanapia played
a more complicated version of it. In this rendition, it is important to note the same principle
wherein kulintang patterns adhere to the rhythmic cycle given by the babandil and dabakan parts
(. Note that in a cycle with more complicated divisions such as the kangungudan, emphases are
given within those cycle subdivisions, in this case at the end of every 3+3+2 (Example 5):
Example 5: Sinulog Kangungudan, Kulintang Pattern against Dabakan
Page 16 of 38
To emphasize these points, the secondary emphases were marked by simultaneous
strokes on the dabakan while the end of the cycle was marked by two accented strokes that are
louder than the rest. The melodic contour of patterns uses the same last two accented beats as its
take off point before any variation or transitions take place (Example 6):
Example 6: Cycles of Sinulog Kangungudan
Page 17 of 38
It is interesting to note that the patterns follow a curved contour within the cycle where
the pitches rise to build up then descend to mark the subdivisions of cycles or end of cycles.
Benitez (2005) mentioned doubling of strokes to emphasize certain beats but we also find that
the rise and fall of melodic contours reinforce the rhythmic cycle and its subdivisions. End of
Page 18 of 38
cycles are either marked by double strokes or used as pick up points to signal a change in the
pattern or a variation.
Value of Imitation in the Creation of Kulintang Patterns. Most kulintang music
follows a similar melody and rhythmic patterns. Although no two kulintang performances are
alike, a marker of a correct rendition would be if it is still recognizable as a binalig, sinulog,
tidtu, duyug, and tagunggo. Kanapia Kalanduyan related that the patterns that he plays on the
kulintang are a combination of his ideas and the previous patterns he has heard from other
players. The conversation revealed that imitation is a valued skill in a kulintang player. The more
patterns a player can recall the better s/he is in the eyes of the Maguindanaon audience.xiii Since
imitation is based on hearing others play and not on a fixed written notation, the rendition would
naturally be personalized in a lot of ways. The basis of good playing would be whether the
rendition is close enough to the original. The best kulintang player in Maguindanao society in
this regard is Amal Lumuntod, who is able to create numerous variations on previously heard
kulintang.xiv Most of the styles of younger musicians, including that of Kanapia and his siblings,
were imitations of Amal’s versions.
During this time, we elected to have Kanapia listen to Hideaki’s imitation/version of the
tagunggo to check whether the rendition is acceptable or not (see Appendix A). This is the best
way to learn whether a player’s rendition is correct or not: through the approval or rejection of
the audience or seasoned kulintang musicians, in this case Kanapia. To our delight, Kanapia
exclaimed after the conclusion, “Tama yun! Tagunggo pa rin yung ginawa niya” (That’s correct!
He played a recognizable Tagunggo). He recognized immediately that Hideaki’s version is a
combination of taga-Irud (North) and taga-laya (Laya) styles. Hideaki then explained that he
Page 19 of 38
learned the tagunggo by listening to Pamela and her student Hector Montances playxv and to
three different CDs by Danongan Kalanduyan, Kanapia’s prominent kulintang player brother
based in the United States. Hideaki had come up with the version he just played and he received
a favorable commendation from Kanapia for his efforts. Kanapia said that the rendition was good
because it was in the style of tagunggo and anyone would be able to recognize it as such. The
combination of styles worked as well since that is precisely how they learn to play kulintang: by
combining and imitating different styles of kulintang players.
Traditionally, kulintang is learned through informal oral transmission. When Kanapia
was still a young boy, he and his siblings would listen to Amal Lumontod’s kulintang playing
whenever he was resting from working at the farm. They would request different versions of the
kulintang genres, both abstract ones and those that communicate stories. They would then sing
along with Amal’s playing and later on imitate on the saronay.xvi Since Amal was their uncle
and lived close to them, it was easy for them to ask him to play certain patterns if they forgot
them. Kanapia’s son also learned to play the kulintang in the same way, just by imitating his
father’s style. Kanapia would then correct him if he got stuck on difficult patterns.
This style of learning through imitation resulted to similar sequence of patterns in the
kulintang. According to Aga Mayo Butocan, the patterns are then personalized in three ways: (1)
doubling of rhythm on single tones or rolling; (2) simultaneous playing of the gongs at certain
points; and (3) variation and extension of patterns (Example 7):
Example 7: Transcription of Three Techniques of Improve as Demonstrated by Aga Mayo Butocan
Page 20 of 38
For Aga Mayo the execution of these three techniques will depend on the skills of the
kulintang player and will require practice. This is the reason why she systematically tried to find
a way to teach exercises to her students in order to train the hands to play the gongs evenly and
effortlessly. She believes that learning the proper techniques is the only way a learner of the
kulintang will be able to replicate the desired timbre on the gongs as well as execute
improvisations through rapid doubling of strokes, simultaneous playing of gongs in a fast
passage, and inserting additional gongs in already dense patterns.
Communication between Instruments through Replication of Improvised Rhythms.
In our lessons with Aga Mayo Butocan, she emphasized how the dabakan, agung, babandil and
gandingan should be able to respond to the rhythmic improvisations of the kulintang. Although
the kulintang instruments are confined to the rhythmic mode in their own improvisations, the
scope is widened through the communication between the instruments. This point has also been
expressed by Kanapia Kalanduyan. Since the kulintang can improvise in three ways, as
mentioned above, each time the player employs any of those techniques the other instruments
should also be able to respond in order to maintain the tightness of the ensemble. According to
Page 21 of 38
Butocan, if the kulintang player is very skilled in ornamentations and if the dabakan stays on the
basic pattern, it will not be aesthetically pleasing. Besides, one of the interesting things in
playing in a kulintang ensemble is the interplay among instruments. Accents are very important
to variegate patterns in the dabakan according to the changes in the kulintang. If the kulintang
and dabakan are together rhythmically, according to Aga Mayo, it is said to be “malinis
pakinggan” (literally, “clean to listen to”). It seems that her style, which is taga-Irud (north),
prefers a more coordinated rhythm on the kulintang and the dabakan compared to the more
polyrhythmic style of taga-Laya (south) as evident in the way she had us change our dabakan
pattern for the tagunggo in order to reinforce the kulintang’s rhythm more (Example 8):
Example 8: Basic Kulintang Pattern and the Comparison of Dabakan Rhythms in Tagunggo
by Butocan, Kanapia, and Danny Kalanduyan
Page 22 of 38
The four points on improvisation addressed in this section are evident in the style of
Danongan “Danny” Kalanduyan as our close analysis of his different renditions of the tagunggo
will reveal. The following sections will focus on Danny’s style of kulintang playing to further
clarify the techniques in kulintang improvisation.
The Formal Design of Kulintang Realizations
The overall form of kulintang music is cyclic. As Aga Mayo Butocan has pointed out,
each rendition “can be seen to consist of an introduction, repeated sections, ascending and
descending transitional passages, and a conclusion” (Butocan 1987: 26). In the introduction, the
five instruments in the kulintang ensemble are introduced one by one, and the order of entrance
is usually fixed and common to all Maguindanaon kulintang genres: babandil, dabakan,
kulintang, gandingan, and agung (Kalanduyan 1996: 9). After the babandil and dabakan enter,
the kulintang performer hits gong 3 repeatedly. This section is for the ensemble to play together
and in the tempo the kulintang player wishes “who has the authority to speed up or slow down
the tempo according to her personal taste and to suit the composition which she intends to play”
(Cadar and Garfias 1996: 110). The main body of a rendition is essentially the alternation of two
main distinct musical ideas that we shall call A and B, each of which is usually repeated roughly
three times, and which according to Butocan, “for other players in the ensemble to respond to the
improvisation.”xvii The two main ideas are always bridged with transition in which another
melodic fragment is repeated. Each performance has a short conclusion on a fixed pattern
(Figure 3):
Figure 3: The Formal Structure of Kulintang Performance
Page 23 of 38
Butocan gives three examples (Int=Introduction, Asc=Ascending Transition,
Des=Descending Transition, and Conc=Conclusion) (Butocan 1987: 26-7):
o Int—A—Asc—B—Des—Conc
o Int—A—Asc—B—Des—A—Asc—B—Des—Conc
o Int—A—Asc—B—Des—A—Asc—B—Des—A—Asc—Des—Conc
The principle is simple and yet it can generate a number of different forms even without
considering variations. For instance, the two versions of Tagunggo by Butocan shown above are
different from any of them (ibid. 1987: 74-6):
o Int—A1—A2—A3—A4—A5—Des—A1—Conc
o Int—A1—A2—Asc—B—Des—A1—Conc
Page 24 of 38
Analysis of Kalanduyan’s Performances of Tagunggo
In this section, we will examine three recordings of tagunggo as performed by Danny.
Tagunggo is one of the Magindanaon modes in kamamatuan (old) style. Tagunggo is the only
kulintang genre that was originally performed for ritual purposes, accompanying a trance dance
by a male or female shaman in a kapagubad and kapagipad ceremonies (Kalanduyan 1996).
These ceremonies relate to difficult labor in childbirth and serious illness, respectively.
The three recordings are quite different in setting as well as in the way he realizes them.
The 1994 recording was made in a purely musical context, performed with the full ensemble and
without dance. The 2003 recording also comes with the full ensemble, but the sound of the bell,
attached to the ankle, suggests that this performance was probably accompanying dance or at
least meant to create such an atmosphere.xviii The 2004 recording was made for educational
purpose and the kulintang part was recorded without accompaniment. Danny follows the formal
design discussed in the previous section in his three recordings of tagunggo. However, the
number of repeats differs from one another (T=Transition: no distinction between ascending and
descending):
1994: Int—A1—T—B1—T—A2—T—B2—T—A3—T—B3—T—A4—Conc
2003: Int—A1—T—B2—T—A2—T—B2—T—A3—T—A4—Conc
2004: Int—A1—T—B2—T—A2—T—Conc
The 1994 recording is extensive with many section repeats, lasting three minutes and 25
seconds. It is also the fastest recording of the three. The 2004 recording is made concise with
much less variation and more repetitions of single variations and lasts two minutes and three
seconds, perhaps to suit the educational purpose. The latter does not return to Section A or B
Page 25 of 38
after the transition and leads straight to the conclusion. The 2003 rendition is unique in that he
plays A4 where B3 is expected. Its duration is two minutes and 35 seconds. A full transcription
of the three recordings is given in Appendice B, C, and D.
The introduction is played on gong 3 with some variations. Cycles in Sections A and B
are the focus of this section and will be discussed in detail below. Danny’s version of tagunggo
transition usually consists of the repetition of a one-cycle pattern, with (example a) or without
(example b) a preceding pattern derived from Section B motives. Either way, it functions as a
bridge between gongs 3 and 5, the melody focuses on Sections A and B, respectively. The
transition involves much less degree of improvisation than Sections A and B. The conclusion is
one- cycle long and leaves little room for further elaboration.
The variations that Danny makes in the A Sections of these recordings are all based on
one of the six basic cycles (something of a melodic skeleton) and shown in Example 9:
Example 9: Variations of the Six Basic Cycles in the Three Recordings of Tagunggo by Danongan Kalanduyan
Page 26 of 38
All the variations in Example 12 are labeled such as 11 and 34, for example. They do not
appear in this order in any of the actual performances but are shown roughly in the order of
complexity for the sake of comparison (the precise ordering is nearly impossible as Danny
applies the variation techniques discussed below quite freely and extensively). In general, the
more variation is added, the larger the number becomes. Pattern x0 is the skeleton of each motive
and shown as reference. Danny never uses any of them and everything is more or less variegated.
A sort of phrase extension of Motive 6, and Motive 5 does not have a skeleton. There are two
instances of negative-number variations, namely 1-1 and 3-1. This means they are simpler (by
omission of notes) than the original skeleton. He employs the following variation techniques:
Doubling. Aga Mayo Butocan mentioned three ways of making variations, and this is
one of them.xix A gong is hit twice instead of once. This is arguably the variation technique that
Danny employs most extensively.xx All pairs of two sixteenth notes on the same gong in
Example 12 are the result of doubling. This is the most prominent variation technique that he
uses. It is usually exercised on an eighth note (or one beat) and consists of two types: (1) the
most common rhythm produced by the doubling is dactylic (long-short-short or exx). Gong 2 of
most of the pickups (on beat 4) and seen in most pickups is doubled, creating the forwardmoving rhythm. All Patterns 2 (except 29) and 6 (except 67) have a pickup doubled this way; and
(2) anapestic (short-short-long or xxe) rhythm is also common, seen in 57, 58, 59, 510, 68, 69, and
610. These two types of doubling are combined on a single beat in 58, 59, 510, and 48. The four
strokes on gong 2 in this last instance are possibly played with the left hand only—an amazing
instance of Danny’s virtuosity. The other type of doubling is done on the quarter note (or a note
Page 27 of 38
occupying two beats), turning q into ee. He doubles gong 3 on beat 3 in his 2004 recording and
creates such patterns as 13, 24, 212, 49, and 410. When the second eighth note is further divided
into two sixteenth notes, the exx rhythm results from a single quarter note. This is seen in
patterns 210 in the 2004 recording.
Simultaneous Stroke. This is another technique mentioned by Butocan. The empty hand
is always available for a simultaneous stroke on another gong to ornament the melody, but this
has to be done (as with all other variation techniques) with good taste and within the style.
Although most of gong 3 strokes on beat 3 in Patterns 2, 3, 4, and 6 are hit with gong 2, it is
already in the written version (including the two by Butocan) and may not be considered a
variation.xxi More obvious examples include the use of gong 2 under gong 3 on beat one in the
1994 recording (45 and 411) and that of gong 3 over gong 1 on beat 4 in the 2004 recording (212,
410, 62, and 610).
Rhythmic Displacement. The syncopated pattern emerges as a result of rhythmic
displacement. This occurs exclusively to Pattern 4, where the first three notes on gongs 3, 4, and
5 (eee) is squeezed into exx.
Melodic Variation and Extension. This is the other variation technique that Butocan related.
All of the above variation techniques are concerned with the rhythmic aspect of patterns, but
Danny also delves into melodic variations. At least in the three recordings under scrutiny here, it
is done in Patterns 5 and 6 in later sections where music becomes more excited and there is more
inspiration for improvisation. 3434 in the first half of these patterns becomes 3534 and then
5534, while 2345 in the second 2344 and then 2244. And they are combined quite freely to
create diverse patterns. The omission of a note can be a subcategory of the melodic variation. It
is rather rare in Patterns 1 through 4 (with only two instances, 1-1 and 3-1) but becomes more
Page 28 of 38
common in Patterns 5 and 6 (54, 55, 64, 65, and 66). Needless to say, all these are combined with
the rhythmic variations discussed above. More melodic variations are seen in Sections B.
Danny exhibits his improvisational prowess to the fullest, instantaneously creating nearly
infinite series of variations on these patterns. However, he does not use them at the spur of the
moment or mix them up in a random order; rather, he has a clear sense of overall formal design
for a complete rendition. Figure 2 shows which variations he uses in all the A Sections in the
three recordings:
Figure 4: Variations in the Tagunggo A Sections Performed by Danongan Kalanduyan
1994 Recording
A1: 1-1→11→12[×4]→33→41→35→28→33→48→41→42
A2: 32→23→29→23→45→411→412→64→412→64
A3: 33[×2]→21→51→61→52→51→56→61
A4: 35→21→61[×2]→412→69→58→510[×2]→68→46→43
2003 Recording
A1: 12[×5]→27→211[×2] →22→27
A2: 3-1→34[×2]→211→53→63→53→63
A3: 35→34→27→53→66→53→65→53→54→55[×2]→67
A4: 31→34→27→47[×2]→44
2004 Recording
A1: 13[×4]→210[×3]
A2: 210→24→25→53→62→57→610→59→610
A3: 26→212→410[×2]→49
The six patterns have different functions in terms of form in his performances. Pattern 1
is introductory and always played at the very beginning only. It cannot end a section since it does
not have gong 3 on beat 3 (in the Western sense), which gives the sense of a closure. All the
following A Sections open with Patterns 2, always preceded by Patterns 3 in the first two
recordings. Patterns 1 and 2 roughly correspond to A1 and A2 of Butocan’s Tagunggo 1,
respectively (1987: 74). Patterns 2 and 3 are closely related: you obtain Pattern 3 if you switch
Page 29 of 38
gongs 2 (except for the last note in the pickup) and 4 of Pattern 2, and vice versa. Pattern 5
cannot end by itself as it does not have gong 3 on beat 3 and is always followed by Pattern 6, its
conclusion as Pattern 5 is melodic extension of Pattern 6. Patterns 4 always conclude the last A
Section, although they occasionally appear before. The patterns in Figure 2 can now be
simplified as shown in Figure 3, which shows a high level of consistency over different
renditions.
Figure 5: The Formal Structure of Tagunggo A Sections Performed by Danongan Kalanduyan
1994 Recording
A1: 1→(2, 3, 4)
A2: (3→2)→(4→6)
A3: (3→2)→(5→6)
A4: (3→2)→6→4→6→(5→6)→4
2003 Recording
A1: 1→2
A2: (3→2)→(5→6)
A3: (3→2)→(5→6)
A4: (3→2)→4
2004 Recording
A1: 1→2
A2: 2→(5→6)
A3: 2→4
This formal consistency is accompanied by the way Danny chooses different variations. In
general, he saves more complicated variations for later A Sections and builds up a climax toward
the end. This can be seen in the increasing size of superscript numbers (see Figure 4).
Not only are the three recordings shaped consistently so they all increase in complexity
and excitement as the music moves on, they are also highly individualized. First, he almost never
reuses the same variation in a different performance (at least in the three recordings examined
here). He achieves this by using certain patterns repeatedly in a single performance (recording),
Page 30 of 38
making them a sort of “signature motives.” Such motives include 412 and 61 in the 1994
recording, 27 and 34 in the 2003 recording, and 210 in the 2004 recording. He also gives highly
differentiated gestures to each rendition. The simultaneous strokes on gongs 2 and 3 in the 1994
recording (aside from its super fast velocity), the ending on gong 2 (instead of 3) on beat 3 in the
2003 recording, and the abundant use of gong 3 through simultaneous stroke are such examples.
Playing the same piece in many different ways is one of the most important abilities of an
excellent kulintang musician, and Danny shows this fairly convincingly.
Cycles in Sections B are two-measures long. Their basic pattern is characterized by the
melodic motion around a single gong with a dactylic (long-short-short) rhythm with the shifting
melodic focus from gong 5 up to gong 8, accompanied with the syncopated left-hand rhythm.
Unlike Section A cycles, the melody in the right hand and accompaniment in the left are clearly
separate here.
In contrast to the strong focus on gong 3 in Sections A, Sections B are melodic variations
around gong 5 (and in later sections moving up to gong 7) with two fixed rhythmic patterns.
Gongs 3 to 8 are in use, although gongs 3 and 4 are used only near the transition. This again
makes a clear contrast to Sections A, where gongs 1 through 4 get the primary focus (with some
usage of gong 5). Danny keeps the doubling and simultaneous strokes to minimum in B Sections,
thus maintaining the rhythmic profile of the pattern. This rhythmical uniformity establishes a
clear contrast with Section A, where the rhythm is much more varied and activated. This does
not mean that Danny does not exercise his improvisational skill here, rather, he focuses on the
third technique of variations mentioned by Butocan, melodic variation. Slightly varied patterns
are put together in such a complicated way that it is nearly impossible to recognize any repetition
of patterns.
Page 31 of 38
The potential variety of paterns through melodic variation is almost infinite, and Danny
achieves a great diversity from a simple pattern. That is possibly why B Sections are longer than
his A Sections. In this sense, his melodic variation matches his rhythmic variations in A
Sections.
Conclusions and Further Thoughts
This study both confirm existing studies and reveal new insights in the creative process of
the Philippine kulintang as a melodic instrument and as an ensemble. Our conversations, lessons,
and analysis of the tagunggo mode as performed and explained by the current prominent master
musicians of the Maguindanaon kulintang revealed several important points regarding
improvisations in performance: (1) centrality of the rhythmic mode; (2) adherence of the
melodic/rhythmic contour to this mode; (3) imitation as a valued skill in a kulintang player; and
(4) communication between instruments during performance. All these four aspects affect the
way a kulintang musician would improvise on the instruments.
The present study affirms that the rhythmic mode is central to any improvisation in the
kulintang ensemble. Rhythmic mode is defined here as consisting of the rhythmic cycle with its
subdivisions and points of emphasis. Instead of framing melodic patterns in the Western concept
of beats in measures, the study reveals that melodic and rhythmic contours of variations are
actually better shaped and conceived within the rhythmic cycle. One complete cycle, or
subdivisions of this cycle in cases where it is complex, is considered the “beat” or proper
tiyempo (tempo) among native kulintang musicians. Hearing the music in this manner allows for
greater freedom in improvisation in the instruments. Adhering to the rhythmic mode creates the
desired tightness in the kulintang ensemble.
Page 32 of 38
Imitation is a very important skill an aspiring kulintang player should develop. The
master musicians Kanapia Kalanduyan, Danongan Kalanduyan, and Aga Mayo Butocan
developed their styles through creative manipulation of existing styles. The patterns are then
learned through exposure and intensive listening of kulintang as performed by various musicians.
A good kulintang player is said to be the one who is able to imitate the complicated styles and be
able to manipulate them creatively into one version of a given rhythmic mode of duyug,
binalig,sinulog, tidtu, and tagunggo.
There is a system of manipulating patterns creatively. The following are the techniques
that came out of our analysis of three versions of tagunggo performed in 1994, 2003, and 2004 in
different contexts by Danongan Kalanduyan: (1) doubling; (2) simultaneous stroke; (3) rhythmic
discplacement; and (4) melodic variations/extensions. The execution of any of these techniques
appears within the bounds of the rhythmic mode and could be a response to the rhythmic changes
in the other accompanying instruments. The instruments in the ensemble are expected to interact
with each other through imitation or response to a change in the rhythm or melodic contour. The
ability to communicate through variations is also a valued skill in the kulintang. For our future
topic, we would like to extend our study of these improvisational techniques against the changes
in other instrumental parts.
The culmination of the theories unlocked in this study was applied to our own versions of
the tagunggo and checked for viability by playing to a master musician. One of the important
goals of this study is not only to analyze what was done by kulintang musicians but how these
techniques can actually be applied by the new learners of the tradition. Only in this manner can
the kulintang develop dynamically in its truest musical form. This is in reaction to the prevalent
Page 33 of 38
way the tradition is taught and learned through a fixed written notation or oral rote method with
fixed patterns.
To conclude, we would like to give our definition of kulintang improvisation based on
the results of this study. Improvisation in kulintang is the creative manipulation and integration
of imitated styles through techniques of doubling, simultaneous stroke, syncopation, omission,
and melodic extensions, in response to the way the other instruments employ any of these
devices within the limitations of the rhythmic mode.
Page 34 of 38
Reference List
Benitez, K. (2005). The Maguindanaon Kulintang: Musical Innovation, Transformation and the
Concept of Binalig. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor.
Butocan, A.M. (1987). Palabunibunyan: A Repertoire of Musical Pieces for the Maguindanaon
Kulintangan. Felicidad A. Prudente (Ed.). Manila: The Philippine Women’s University
Press.
Cadar, U.H. (2001). Kolintang’s Uniquely American Success. In: Yoshitaka Terada (Ed.),
Transcending Boundaries: Asian Musics in North America (pp.21-33). Osaka: National
Museum of Ethnology.
Cadar, U.H. (1996a). The Maranao Kolintang Music and Its Journey in America. Asian Music,
27, 131-47.
Cadar, U.H. (1996b). The Role of Kolintang Music in Maranao Society. Asian Music, 27, 79103. Reprinted, with revision and addition, from Ethnomusicology 17 (1973): 234-49.
Cadar, U.H. (1971). The Maranao Kulintang Music: An Analysis of the Instruments, Musical
Organization, Ethnologies, and Historical Documents. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Washington, Seattle.
Cadar, U. & Garfias, R. (1996). Some Principles of Formal Variation in the Kolintang Music
of the Maranao. Asian Music, 27, 105-22. Reprinted, with revision and addition, from
Ethnomusicology 18 (1974): 43-55.
Costes, P.G. (2005). TUNOG PiL-AM: Creating and Reinventing the Sound of the Filipino
Natives of America. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Washington,
Seattle.
Kalanduyan, D.S. (1996). Maguindanaon Kulintang Music: Instruments, Repertoire,
Performance Contexts, and Social Functions. Asian Music, 27, 3-18.
Kalanduyan, D.S. (1984). The Performance of Maguindanaon Kulintang Music of the Southern
Philippines. Unpublished MA Thesis, University of Washington, Seattle.
Maceda, J. (1998). Gongs and Bamboo: A Panorama of Philippine Music Instruments.
University of the Philippines Press.
Maceda, J. (1963).The Music of the Maguindanao in the Philippines. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles.
Page 35 of 38
Posner, K.L. (1996). A Preliminary Analysis of Style in Maguindanaon Kulintang Music. Asian
Music, 27, 19-32.
Posner, K.L. (1980). The Maguindanaon Kulintang. Unpublished MA Thesis, University of
Washington, Seattle.
Scholz, S. (1996). The Supportive Instruments of the Maguindanaon Kulintang Ensemble. Asian
Music, 27, 33-52.
Scholz, S. (1982). The Supportive Role of the Agung in the Mindanao Kulintang Ensemble.
Unpublished MA Thesis, University of Washington, Seattle.
Terada, Y. (1996). Variational and Improvisational Techniques of Gandingan in the
Maguindanaon Kulintang Ensemble. Asian Music, 27, 53-79.
Terada, Y. (1983). The Role of the Gandingan in the Magindanaon Kulintang Ensemble of the
Philippines. Unpublished MA Thesis, University of Washington, Seattle.
Discography
Kulintang: Ancient gong/drum music from the Southern Philippines, CD recording. Reseda, CA:
World Kulintang Records. ©1994, World Kulintang Institute, Inc. wkcd 72551.
The Oral Tradition of Maguindanon Kulintang, CD recording. Danongan Kalanduyan. ©2004,
Danongan S. Kalanduyan.
Traditional Kulintang Music & Dance of the Southern Philippines, CD recording. Danongan S
Kalanduyan and the Palabuniyan Kulintang Ensemble. San Francisco, CA. USA. ©2003,
Mindanao Lilang-Lilang. CD002.
Page 36 of 38
NOTES
The term kulintang refers both to the row of eight small to medium pot gongs in graduated sizes laid horizontally
on a wooden rack and suspended on strings, as well as the ensemble consisting of the kulintang, agung (two large,
thick-rimmed hanging gongs), gandingan (four large, thin-rimmed hanging gongs), babandil (small, thin-rimmed
hanging gong; this part can be played on the rim of gandingan or kulintang), and dabakan (a goblet-shaped or
barrel-shaped drum).
ii
In the Philippines, kulintang has found its way into the music programs of universities. The most prominent ones
to date are the University of the Philippines and the Philippine Women’s University. Aga Mayo Butocan started
giving individual lessons on the Maguindanaon kulintang at the University of the Philippines in 1968, but it was
only in 1989, during the time of Dr. Felicidad Prudente as head of the Music Research Department, that a formal
diploma degree in Asian Music began to be offered. In this new program the style of instruction changed radically
and students moved progressively in levels and were given set pieces of repertoire to be memorized and performed
in recitals, in the way not unlike students majoring in Western classical instruments. The rationale was that students
had no liberty to acquire a vast amount of repertoire outside of the village context in the short span of four years. At
present, Butocan has more freedom to teach the way she wants and emphasizes more on techniques and
understanding of the kulintang rather than memorization of pieces as performed by kulintang musicians (personal
interview 21 November 2009). The preferred teaching method, however, remains to be reading from the transcribed
cipher notation.
iii
Note that they are not absolute pitches, as she pointed out, but the two gongs 1 are given C for the sake of
comparison. Benitez also lists the tunings of 70 different kulintang sets in pitch names in Appendix B (2005: 15963).
iv
Pelog is applied commonly to Indonesian gamelan tuning of five-tone scale. The other tuning system is the
slendro, which is based on a seven-tone scale.
v
See, for example, Michael Tenzer, Gamelan Gong Kebyar: The Art of twentiehth-Century Balinese Music
(Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2000). In kulintang study, the present authors once used Western pitch
notation but found it unsatisfactory. See Onishi and Costes-Onishi, “The Improvisational Structure of the Philippine
Kulintang: A Semiological Analysis of Tagunggo Performances by Danongan Kalanduyan,” unpublished paper
presented at the College Music Society International Conference (Ayuthaya, Thailand, 21 July 2007) and the DutchFlemish Society for Music Theory 9th International Conference (Groningen, the Netherlands, 23 February 2007).
vi
Cipher notation is a type of notation system using only numbers. It is also used to notate Javanese gamelan music
where pitches are not fixed. Each number in this system corresponds to a gong in the kulintang set. In Aga Mayo
Butocan’s version of this notation for the kulintang, the numbers are placed in a grid of two rows where the upper
boxes are played by the right hand and the lower boxes by the left hand. Each box represents one count and a line
over the number means a half count. Rests are indicated by dots.
vii
One of the problems of this notation system is that it cannot express the right-hand simultaneous stroke correctly.
It doubles the melodic note from above but in the current system it looks like a melodic note.
viii
According to these studies, there are several similarities between the suspended gong agung and the bronze
drums of Southeast Asia, referred to by Bernet-Kempers (1988) as Kettledrums. According to Maceda, “[d]espite
the evident differences in manufacture between suspended gongs and suspended bronze drums, a musical-physical
link between them – in the similarity of the suspension, angle, and center sounds – is evidence for a possible
historical link (1994: 281).”
ix
Archeological evidences revealed that the presence of gongs in the Philippines predates the arrival of the Spanish.
However, it is not clear when the actual kulintang as an ensemble began to be practiced and established. What is
clear is that gong traditions in the Philippines are not directly related to Islam as evident in its current practice
among non-Islamic communities such as the T’boli, Manobo, Bagobo, B’laan, and Tiruray.
i
Earliest Spanish chronicles in the 16th century would indicate that the agong-type instruments were pervasive (Scott
1994). Antonio Pigafetta reported in 1521 an ensemble of bronze gongs in the Visayan islands (the present kulintang
ensemble is prevalent in the Mindanao islands), and in 1667 and 1697 these gongs were again reported in the
accounts of Francisco Combes and William Dampier, respectively (Cadar 1971; Benitez 2005; Costes 2005). Cadar
(1971) noted that Francisco Combes saw a Culintangan during a trance ceremony in Mindanao, a possible evidence
Page 37 of 38
that kulintang was associated with non-Islamic practices. Although, Benitez (2005:124) argued that a later account
by William Dampier would mention the presence of the horizontally laid gongs struck with sticks without the
mention of kulintang; the instrument was used to accompany a circumcision ceremony in the house of the second
most powerful man in the sultanate in Maguindanao. Costes (2005:166) reported that the gongs were played in
ceremonial offerings as witnessed by Combes and Dampier.
x
Other styles would be that of the Sulu people: Tausug, Sama, Badjao, and Yakan.
xi
Benitez (2005:16) contended that the basic parameters that distinguish kulintang genres are: 1) the number of
beats in the musical phrases (two or four beats long); 2) melodic and rhythmic groupings within the musical phrase;
and 3) rhythmic emphasis. Terada (1996:60) distinguishes the genres by rhythmic modes which he defines as: 1)
emphasized points in the rhythmic cycle through dynamic and agogic accents, consistent use of one gong,
simultaneous strokes on the instruments (doubling); and 2) hierarchical order among the accented points.
xii
The ability of the gongs to communicate or send messages cannot be underemphasized as Kanapia Kalanduyan
and Aga Mayo Butocan stressed its importance to Maguindanaon community. Kanapia related several stories to us
that are expressed in the kulintang. The tradition of Apad in the gandingan is meant to converse using only the three
upper gongs of the instrument. This is an interesting study that is beyond the scope of this paper.
xiii
Kanapia shared a story about a competition in the kulintang in his hometown Datu Piang. If there are two
contestants, neither would want to go first because the rule of the competition is that the second player must imitate
whatever the first player will play. The players then take turns on the kulintang with the second player trying to
imitate as close as possible whatever the first player has just played. When the time comes that the first player runs
out of ideas or repertoire, the second player will then lead the competition where the first player should strive hard to
imitate. When both players run out of ideas, the winner will be the contestant who knows the most variations.
xiv
According to Kanapia, José Maceda discovered Amal Lumuntod when he was conducting his research on
Maguindanaon music in the 1950s. When asked where he learned to play kulintang, Amal replied that he copied the
styles of Angkad Bagan and another famous blind kulintang player. The exceptional quality in Amal’s playing lied
on his variations of the styles that he initially imitated. Amal created more variations than anyone and even Bagan
exclaimed that Amal was already better than him. It is believed that Amal pioneered the new styles in kulintang
playing that resulted in renewed interest among younger people in the tradition.
xv
Pamela’s tagunggois a version of Aga Mayo Butocan’s that she learned at the University of the Philippines.
Hector Montances is an ensemble member of Tunog Pil-Am, a Filipino American youth contemporary Philippine
music sensemble that Pamela directed in Tacoma, Washington in 2000-2005.
xvi
The saronay is a small version of the kulintang made out of metal slabs that are strung together. It is considered
an instrument for young kids among the Maguindanaons. The saronay is now being used as practice instrument by
university students of the kulintang.
xvii
Personal communication with Butocan, 21 November 2009.
xviii
The track list of the CD runs: “Tagunggo (For “Sagayan Na Dilabpet” Dance).”
xix
Personal communication, 21 November 2009. See also section on Conversations on improvisation with master
musicians in this paper.
xx
This technique is also favored by other kulintang masters, including Aga Mayo Butocan. Her inclination towards
doubling is apparent in her CD, “Aga Mayo Butocan: Maguindanao Kulintang” (Tao Music 002, 2001). Her demo
performance was also full of doublings (personal interview, Manila, the Philippines, 21 November 2009).
xxi
A1 in Tagunggo 1 and 2 (Butocan 1987: 74-7) and A2 in Tagunggo 2 (Butocan 1987: 76), for example.
Page 38 of 38