Pianola Paper

Kermit-Canfield 1
Mechanical Music: Igor Stravinsky and the Player Piano
Introduction
Stravinsky’s Étude pour pianola (1917) is an intriguing piece, and one that has not been
given much thought by the scholarly community.1 It is interesting, because it is written for
reproducing piano, was not commissioned, and is both predictive of Stravinsky’s appropriation
of the rag idiom and backwards looking to his Russian period through the use of ostinatos and
non-developing blocks. A short work, the Étude pour pianola fits perfectly into Stravinsky’s
compositional output just a few years before his turn to neoclassicism. Later in life, Stravinsky
adapted the Étude for orchestra as the fourth movement of his Orchestral études (1928), entitled
“Madrid.”
In this paper, I will discuss the inception of Stravinsky’s relationship with the pianola, his
only solo composition for the instrument, and that piece’s later orchestration. Before we dive
into Stravinsky’s discovery of the pianola, I will first describe the instrument’s history and
technical abilities. I will then explain Stravinsky’s interaction with the mechanical piano—from
his introduction to the instrument in 1912 through the abandonment of his pianola transcriptions
of his ballets in the 1930’s. I will argue that Stravinsky began writing for pianola for two main
reasons—first, for financial reasons, second, as a way to remove variability from performances.
I will then provide an analysis of the Étude pour Pianola followed by a comparison with the
1928 orchestrated edition. Finally, I will offer some opinions about what Stravinsky might
think—had he lived today—about modern day reproducing piano-inspired technologies.
1
As Maureen Carr points out in her forthcoming book, perhaps the Étude is not studied
because the score is virtually unknown, see Maureen Carr, After the Rite: Stravinsky’s Path to
Neoclassicism from 1914 to 1925 (Oxford University Press), Chapter 4, page 1.
Kermit-Canfield 2
Pianola History
The notion for the player piano actually predates the invention of the instrument by
several centuries.2 The basic concept is for music to be stored in a manner that it can be later
recreated or realized by the instrument. A set of church bells is a prime example of this model.
In addition to a mechanism for keeping and displaying time (the clock), a second apparatus is
responsible for ringing the bells, and thus realizing a short musical melody stored on pinned
barrels, in the correct order every quarter hour. Other early automated instruments included the
barrel organ and various types of music boxes. The first automatic playing piano was the barrel
piano, created around the end of the eighteenth century.3 Early mechanical pianos used a variety
of crude methods for storing the music such as pinned barrels. It was not until 1842 that
perforated paper rolls were used as the storage medium. The music is stored in the following
manner: along the width of the roll holes are punched that correspond to pitch and along the
length of the roll durations are recorded. Thus, a longer note will require a longer length hole
(see Figure 1). Piano rolls are either produced with a special machine that records the
performance of a live musician directly onto a roll or by copy editors who hand punch the rolls.4
As Rex Lawson, a concert pianolist, points out, these rolls are often created by unskilled
2
The names “player piano,” “reproducing piano,” and “autopiano” are all synonyms for
the same instrument. The term “pianola,” although often colloquially used to name any
reproducing piano, referrers to a specific model of player piano invented in 1895 by E.S. Votey
and later produced by the Aeolian corporation. See Frank Holland, “Pianola,” Grove Music
Online. Oxford Music Online (2012).
3
4
Arthur Ord-Hume, “Player Piano,” Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online (2007).
Stravinsky made a few recordings of his piano works on these machines, but most of his
pianola scores were hand-punched by copy editors.
Kermit-Canfield 3
Figure 1: Stylized fragment of a piano roll showing how the X-axis represents pitch from
low to high and the Y-axis represents time. The roll is pulled through the reproducing
piano and notes are triggered where there are holes in the paper.
workers, and the resulting rolls contain little or no musical interpretation.5
Early score realization was not particularly good either. Some early attempts were unable
to produce long sustained sounds—instead they repeatedly struck long notes yielding a tremolo
effect. Most early reproducing pianos were clumsy and clunky, and did not sound very good.
Over the years, magnetic and pneumatic technologies improved piano roll performance.6 The
first commercially successful roll operated pianos became available between 1895 and 1897.
5
Rex Lawson, “What Is a Concert Pianolist?,” Rex Lawson - Concert Pianolist,
http://www.rexlawson.com/index.html?contents.html&0.
6
The developments of technologies that improved player piano construction and
performance are beyond the scope of this paper. For a more detailed discussion of player piano
development, see “History of the Pianola: An Overview,” The Pianola Institute,
http://www.pianola.org /history/history.cfm; “The Reproducing Piano: An Overview,” The
Pianola Institute, http://www.pianola.org/reproducing/reproducing.cfm; and Arthur Ord-Hume,
“Player Piano”.
Kermit-Canfield 4
One of these instruments, the Aeolian company's "pianola," became the gold standard for
reproducing pianos worldwide.7
How the Pianola Works8
Most pianolas are played by an operator, called a pianolist. While the controls on
different models and makes of reproducing piano differ slightly, I will describe one standard
configuration. Most instruments operate using suction, which is supplied by two foot pedals.
There is a mechanism to prevent the winding of the roll from becoming erratic, making the foot
pedals mostly responsible for controlling dynamics. As the feet are occupied with the pedals
where the sustain and soft pedals would be on a normal piano, these controls are relocated to be
operated by the hands, along with a tempo lever used to add rubato to the performance. Most
pianolas also contain a split in the pneumatic mechanism, usually between E4 and F4. These are
connected to two more levers, which allow different dynamic levels between the treble and bass
of the instrument. Another lever controls whether the instrument plays the roll forwards or
rewinds the roll. Two final controls, the “Thermodist” and “Metrostyle,” were originally
invented by the Aeolian company, and are fancier and more sophisticated controls for adding
accents and realizing a prerecorded tempo respectively.
7
8
Rex Lawson, Stravinsky: The Rite of Spring Petrushka (New York: Nimbus, 1991), 4.
I rely heavily on Rex Lawson’s description of what it is a pianolist does as he has over
forty years of experience performing with pianolas, see Lawson, “What Is a Concert Pianolist?”.
Kermit-Canfield 5
Stravinsky and the Pianola9
Stravinsky's relationship with the pianola lasted about fifteen years, from 1915–30.10
Although he only wrote one piece for solo pianola, the Étude pour pianola (1917), he was
commissioned to transcribe all of his works for the instrument. From 1921–30, Stravinsky lived
in the Paris Pleyel factory, where he was also granted a workshop.11 Stravinsky's first interaction
with the pianola probably came on December 12, 1912, when Stravinsky was visiting
Schoenberg in Berlin for a performance of Pierrot Lunaiere in Chorlain Saal, where many
mechanical instruments were on display.12 Lawson writes that although Stravinsky may have
started thinking about writing for mechanical instruments at this time, he did not seriously
consider the pianola until his first visit to Aeolian Hall in August, 1914 for a demonstration of
the pianola.13
Stravinsky probably considered the pianola as a solo instrument for several reasons.
First, it can reproduce rhythms with impeccable precision. Moreover, in addition to its
metronomic qualities, the pianola can produce consistent sounds. For example, if a pianist
strikes a single note twenty times, there will be perceivable differences in the length, loudness,
9
Stravinsky referred to all reproducing instruments (including organs, music boxes,
pianos, etc.) as pianolas—including models made by the Aeolian Company’s rivals. For a
complete list of known Stravinsky piano rolls, see Rex Lawson, “Stravinsky and the Pianola
(Part 2),” Pianola Journal 2 (1989): 10–16.
10
Mark McFarland, “Stravinsky and the Pianola: A Relationship Reconsidered,” Revue
De Musicologie 97, no. 1 (2011): 85; and Lawson, “Stravinsky and the Pianola (Part 2),” 5.
11
Pleyel et Cie (“Pleyel and Company”) is a piano company that was instrumental in
pianola development and manufacturing in France, see McFarland, “Stravinsky and the Pianola:
A Relationship Reconsidered,” 85.
12
Ibid., 88.
13
Lawson, Stravinsky: The Rite of Spring and Petrushka, 6.
Kermit-Canfield 6
and consequentially, the timbre of each note. A reproducing piano can be much more precise, as
the mechanical parts ensure the hammer hits the piano strings at the same velocity each time.
Second, the pianola can perform music that humans could not otherwise perform. It is not
limited to ten simultaneous notes, nor constrained to traditional chord spacing. As Stravinsky's
music is both rhythmically and harmonically challenging to perform, the pianola seems to be the
perfect musician. Edwin Evans writes that the pianola does not create new timbres; it just allows
a composer to exceed the limitations of human performers.14
Beyond the pianola's capacity to play more accurately than a human, Stravinsky turned to
the pianola for financial reasons. In 1915, the Orchestrelle Company [later the Aeolian
Company] expressed interest in producing piano rolls of the Rite of Spring and Petrushka.15
Stravinsky tried to negotiate a price for these rolls through 1916, but at this time he was
unsuccessful.16 Instead, he turned his attention to producing an original work for reproducing
piano.
An Original Composition: Étude pour pianola17
14
Edwin Evans, “Pianola Music,” Musical Times 62, no. 945 (November 1921): 763.
15
Rex Lawson, “Étude Pour Pianola by Igor Stravinsky,” Pianola Journal 5 (1993): 5.
16
McFarland, “Stravinsky and the Pianola,” 90–91.
17
Sketches for the Étude are located in sketchbook V housed at the Stravinsky Collection
of the Paul Sacher Stiftung (PSS), pages 8–33 (microfilm 123, frames 215–237), along with an
early continuity sketch (microfilm 217, frames 511–528). A fair copy of the score from the
Robert Craft Collection is at the PSS, and a photocopy is housed at the Paul Jacob’s collection at
the New York Public Library. The copyright (1979) to the study score, first published in the
Pianola Journal (volume 5, pages 7–22), is owned by Boosey and Hawkes.
The score for “Madrid,” from the Orchestral Études, is published by Boosey and Hawkes
(1928, revised 1952). A photocopy of the fair copy is housed at the British National Library.
Kermit-Canfield 7
Stravinsky completed the score Étude pour pianola on September 10th, 1917.18 He hoped
to retain the copyright for the Étude by writing only for mechanical piano, and attempted to sell
the roll to the Orchestrelle Company for fifty percent of the profit of each sale.19 The
Orchestrelle Company flatly refused Stravinsky's offer, claiming that it was not optimal for
either the Company or Stravinsky.20 Eventually, Stravinsky conceded and sold the score for 500
Swiss francs, a price the Orchestrelle Company promised they would never again match. 21
Stravinsky later learned that his impressions of copyright law were wrong—by publishing his
work for pianola, other manufacturers would have the right to produce rolls of the work for a
minimal fee.22 It is probable that Stravinsky came up with the idea for a work involving pianola
on his own, but a letter from Edwin Evans asking several European composers to write for
pianola sped up his progress.23 Upon receiving Evans’s request for a pianola work, Stravinsky
wrote to Evans to say he was almost finished with a solo work for the instrument.
Soulima Stravinsky arranged a four-hands version of Madrid in 1951, which is published
by Boosey and Hawkes.
Dr. Maureen Carr was instrumental in helping me locate materials related to the Étude. I
used her transcriptions of sketches, and the beginning of the fourth chapter to her forthcoming
book After the Rite: Stravinsky’s Path to Neoclassicism from 1914 to 1925 covers the Étude.
18
Lawson, “Étude Pour Pianola by Igor Stravinsky,” 5.
19
Ibid.
20
PSS. Microfilm 109, frame 198, correspondence between the Orchestrelle Company
and Igor Stravinsky’s lawyer, Philippe Dunant, dated August 24, 1917, McFarland, “Stravinsky
and the Pianola: A Relationship Reconsidered,” 91, n37.
21
Lawson, “Étude Pour Pianola by Igor Stravinsky,” 5.
22
McFarland, “Stravinsky and the Pianola: A Relationship Reconsidered,” 92.
23
Edwin Evans (1874–1945) was an English music critic who knew Diaghilev and
Stravinsky well, see H.C. Colles, et al., “Evans, Edwin,” Grove Music Online. Oxford Music
Online, http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/09101.
Kermit-Canfield 8
Example 1: Transcription of melodic fragments off a postcard sent from Ansermet.
Published in Claude Tappolet, Correspondence Ansermet—Stravinsky 1914–1967
(Geneva: Georg Editions, 1990), 61, reprinted in Maureen Carr, After the Rite:
Stravinsky’s Path to Neoclassicism from 1914 to 1925, Chapter 4, page 2.
The musical influences for the Étude come from Mediterranean music of Madrid and
Naples. Stravinsky visited Madrid in 1916 with the Ballet Russes and enjoyed the various street
music he heard.24 Later, in April 1917, Stravinsky received a postcard from Ernst Ansermet in
Naples with a phrase of Spanish dance music scrawled on it, of which Stravinsky used as
inspiration for a motivic idea (See Example 1).25 Stravinsky wanted to give the impression of
being bombarded with melodies and sounds of a busy street scene, and for this reason quotes
folk songs.
24
25
Lawson, “Étude Pour Pianola by Igor Stravinsky,” 5.
Claude Tappolet, Correspondence Ansermet—Stravinsky 1914–1967 (Geneva: Georg
Editions, 1990), 61, reprinted in Carr, After the Rite, Chapter 4, page 2.
Kermit-Canfield 9
Abandoning the Pianola
Although the first draft of Stravinsky’s ballet Les noces (1923) had parts for four
pianolas, he abandoned writing for the instrument shortly after writing the Étude. Stravinsky
claimed that he removed the pianola parts from Les noces due to the difficulty of synchronizing
four mechanical instruments with other musicians and dancers. However, Walsh claims that
there is no evidence that there was a problem with coordinating mechanical instruments.26 In his
revisions, Stravinsky also removed the cimbaloms and harmonium parts. The removal of such
instruments, the pianolas included, would have made the work easier to perform.
A more persuasive argument for why Stravinsky deserted the pianola comes from
Ansermet’s review of the pianola’s capabilities presented in a letter to Stravinsky in June 1919.27
At this point, Stravinsky had not yet heard the piano roll for the Étude pour pianola.28 Ansermet
wrote that the pianola lacked the mechanical strength he had expected, the rhythmic accuracy
was compromised by the performer’s ability to add rubato, and the pianola’s weak ability to
produce low frequencies. The weaknesses of the instrument resonated strongly with Stravinsky
and encouraged him to cease writing for it.
The Aeolian company stopped producing classical music rolls in the early 1930s,
including canceling Stravinsky’s contract to transfer his entire catalogue for piano roll. A few
26
Stephen Walsh, Stravinsky: A Creative Spring, Russia and France, 1882-1934 (New
York: Knopf, 1999), 622.
27
Claude Tappolet, Correspondence Ansermet—Stravinsky 1914–1967 (Geneva: Georg
Editions, 1990), 115–17, reprinted in McFarland, “Stravinsky and the Pianola,” 94–95.
28
Stravinsky did not hear his piece until 1921.
Kermit-Canfield 10
Figure 2: This diagram shows the nature of block form in Stravinsky’s Étude pour
pianola. The numbers along the top represent measure number and the lines below
demonstrate how the blocks are juxtaposed and superimposed. The blocks marked in
grey are subsidiary to the larger blocks that contain them.
years later, they went out of business entirely due to the popularity of the more versatile
phonograph.29
Analysis
The musical material for the Étude appears in non-developing blocks. Maureen Carr
describes the forms as being progressive, as Stravinsky continuously juxtaposes and
superimposes melodic fragments over several different ostinato patterns.30 In this respect, the
Étude resembles Stravinsky’s writing from his earlier Russian period. Other aspects of the
works, such as the multiple ascending scales and other melodic fragment foreshadow textures
that will later appear in Concertino (1920) and the Octet for Winds (1919–1923).31 In this work,
29
Always trying to be on the cutting edge of technology, Stravinsky was among the first
to embrace the phonographic recording medium.
30
Carr, After the Rite: Stravinsky’s Path to Neoclassicism from 1914 to 1925, Chapter 4,
31
Ibid., Chapter 4, Page 6.
page 5.
Kermit-Canfield 11
there are five distinct blocks, the first three of which are presented quite clearly as cohesive units
before various elements from the blocks start getting overlayed, (see Figure 2).32
The first block (mm. 1–6), although clear cut in its presentation, shows the complexity of
Stravinsky’s composition (see Example 2A). Written on three staves, Stravinsky writes three
“formulaic” lines—all using the same rhythm—that mesh together to create the first texture. On
the top staff, he writes a single chord (G-sharp – E – A), which is repeated for the first five
measures of the block before cadencing on E after an idiomatic “turn figure.”33 The middle staff
contains a neighboring figure presented in octaves cadencing on F-sharp. The last staff contains
a neighboring figure presented in fifths, cadencing on E with the “turn” from the highest voice.
Its harmonic motion is limited to two chords (D and E) and changes more slowly than the octave
neighboring figure.
The second block (mm. 7–10) acts as a cadential idea, as it comes back in its entirety at
the end of almost every section. Stravinsky presents multiple ascending lines in steady sixteenth
notes.34 Although not necessarily starting on the tonic pitches, he layers B, D, and F major
scales with a chromatic scale starting on G and octatonic arpeggiations that include the tonics of
the major scales (see Example 2B). This block concludes with the rhythm from the “turn figure”
cadencing on E-flat.
32
Ibid., Chapter 4, page 6.
33
I call this “turn figure” idiomatic, as it returns throughout the piece as a consistent
element. The term “turn figure” comes from Maureen Carr, and describes Stravinsky’s use of a
triplet figure containing an upper neighbor that functions cadentially and is derived from a
rhythmic pattern from Ansermet’s postcard (see note 25).
34
Some of the scales cross from one staff to another. It is important to note that although
written on up to six staves, this work is written for a single instrument, and a mechanical one at
that. When looking at the score, it is convenient that the editor has spread the notes out over six
staves and used many enharmonically spelled notes (which the pianola is immune to
misreading).
Kermit-Canfield 12
Example 2: First 10 measures of Etude pour pianola by Igor Stravinsky. 2A is block 1
and 2B is block 2.
In the third block (mm. 11–15) we start understanding the importance of Stravinsky’s
ostinatos. There are three ostinatos: the lowest voice alternates between F and B-flat, the middle
voice arpeggiates through D – A – G-sharp – E, and the upper voice oscillates between E-flat and
A-flat. These ostinatos are summarized in Table 1. On top of these repeated patterns, we hear a
melodic fragment, which is immediately sounded a second time and expanded. In the second
presentation of the third block (mm. 19–25), the melody is further expanded.
Kermit-Canfield 13
Table 1: Three ostinatos from block 3.
The fourth block (mm. 26–44) is slightly longer and more complex than previously heard
blocks. Unified by a four measure (17 eighth note) bass ostinato, we are presented with a faster
changing texture. This section sounds improvisatory, and acts as the first development section.
The form of this block can be further subdivided into fragments of music that are spliced
together (see Figure 3). While it may be composed of many juxtaposed and superimposed
chunks of music, upon closer inspection we see that some of the blocks are being developed. For
example, the first fragment of music [which I call A] (28–32) is a motive centered around E-flat,
decorated by an F and concluded with the turn figure. This is accompanied by ostinatos
consisting of a B-flat trill and two dyads, the first composed of an A-flat and G, the second of Dflat and A-natural. This fragment is interrupted by a second fragment [let's call it B] (32–35)
composed of a decorated descending scale and short motive concluded with the turn figure and
accompanied by a three eight note om pah pah ostinato. When the first fragment comes back, it
is heard expanded and up an octave. Additionally, its accompanying ostinatos have been
expanded, adding both variety and a hint of development, instead of being heard as a direct
repetition. Measures 40–46 contain scale fragments that are reminiscent of fragment B. On the
last eighth note of measure 45, chords from block one return, transposed down a major second.
Kermit-Canfield 14
Figure 3: Summary of material from the fourth block of Étude pour pianola.
Starting in measure 47, it's seems as if block one has returned in a fuller texture. It is twice
interrupted, first by a measure of the ostinato from A, second by a hint of the ornamented chords
of B. For the last five measures of the block, the bass ostinato changes in conjunction with
fragments from block1 with the addition of new material.
The fifth block is the climax of the work, and combines new material with elements of
the four previous blocks. Unlike the other blocks, which have been unified by at least one
consistent ostinato, block 5 is characterized by its lack of a unifying element. Instead, various
ostinatos and melodic fragments interrupt and overlap with each other. This section seems even
more improvisatory and chaotic than the rest of the piece. Melodic ideas are introduced,
interspliced, and switched amongst in a manner that heightens the musical excitement.
Orchestrating the Étude pour pianola
Left alone until 1928, we are left wondering why Stravinsky decided to orchestrate the
Étude pour pianola, and its use as the fourth movement of his Orchestral Études, then entitled
“Madrid.” There are several possible explanations, although we will probably never know for
sure what Stravinsky's reasoning was. Time and time again we have seen Stravinsky reuse
Kermit-Canfield 15
material, and it seems he never threw anything away. For example, when Anthony and
Cleopatra (1917) fell through, he recycled and reworked the material, using it for Histoire du
soldat (1918).35 Furthermore, Stravinsky reused or repeated material from previous
compositions, such as his use of motives from Rite of Spring (1913) and Firebird (1910) in later
compositions, and in an extreme example, works by Pergolesi, Gallo, and others are very clearly
used as source material for Pulcinella.36
In addition to reusing material from composition to composition, Stravinsky often
released multiple versions of the same work. A good example is Symphony of Wind Instruments,
for which Stravinsky released two versions, the first in 1920, the second in 1947. Pianola
transcriptions of his entire catalogue should also be included in this list. Stravinsky was
frequently in need of money, and publishing or having multiple versions of pieces performed
contributed to his income. A dedication of a work, such as Piano Rag Music (1919) to Arthur
Rubenstein, or an orchestration or piano reduction of an earlier work could yield quick cash.
The first three Orchestral études are orchestrations of the Three pieces for string quartet
(1914). It seems rather peculiar that the Étude would be combined with these works. Perhaps
Stravinsky's publisher requested that he include a fourth movement in order to publish the
Orchestral études. In 1927, Stravinsky reinherited the copyright for the Étude pour pianola from
the Aeolian Company. Stravinsky could have used the Étude as part of the Orchestral études as
35
Maureen Carr, ed., Stravinsky’s Histoire Du Soldat: A Facsimile of the Sketches (New
York: A-R Editions, 2005), 11.
36
While Stravinsky did not write the music of the sources, I include it as an example of
Stravinsky's tendency to reuse previously written musical material. In the same manner,
Stravinsky quotes Mussorgsky, Russian folk songs, and rag music in other works—albeit in a
much smaller quantity.
Kermit-Canfield 16
a way to publish the Étude pour pianola, as it was never released in a form other than piano roll
at this point.
A final consideration is that Stravinsky may have originally written the Étude pour
pianola to include other instruments. In Stravinsky's sketches for the Étude, now housed at the
Paul Sacher Stiftung in Basel, Switzerland, Stravinsky has indicated some material to be played
by instruments other than pianola. While these notations may have been added at a later point in
time, the instruments indicated in the sketches usually do not match the instruments used in the
1928 orchestrated edition (see Table 2). A prime example of Stravinsky’s tendency to change
instrumentation comes from Symphonies of Wind Instruments. In his article, Walsh writes ”he
could change his mind so often about basic details, and be so frequently indecisive and fallible
over material...”37 While in this instance Walsh is discussing Symphonies of Wind Instruments
and not the Étude pour pianola, I find it extremely likely that Stravinsky would have had the
same artistic problem deciding his instrumentation. It is probable that Stravinsky changed his
mind about instrumentation of the Étude in a similar manner. If Stravinsky had originally
planned on writing for pianola and other instruments, it makes sense that he returned to the piece
at a latter time to finish what he started.
Adapting the Étude for orchestra
Some aspects of Stravinsky’s orchestration are very standard and not surprising. For
example, consider the first five bars. Stravinsky has assigned his instrumentation according to
register. The piccolo, flutes and first violins cover the top voices, the oboes, clarinets, and
37
Stephen Walsh, “Stravinsky’s Symphonies: Accident or Design?,” in Analytical
Strategies and Music Interpretation: Essays on Nineteenth- and Twentieth-century Music (New
York: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 49.
Kermit-Canfield 17
Table 2: Selected instrumentation differences between Stravinsky’s sketches for Étude pour
pianola and the published Boosey and Hawkes score for “Madrid” from the Orchestral etudes.
second violins play the middle register voices, and the violas, cellos, and trombones provide the
bass support. This is a typical orchestral texture where the timbre of strings and woodwinds are
combined in the upper voices and brass and low strings act together in the lower voices. While
the combined timbre of strings and woodwinds is harmonically rich, it is not suited for consistent
use through the entire piece as it would get boring rather quickly. For this reason, Stravinsky
varies the instrumentation, which also highlight his use of block form.
Kermit-Canfield 18
In Block 3, which occurs the first time two measure before rehearsal 2 (R2) of “Madrid,”
the bass ostinato is written for timpani, cello, and bass, the two midrange ostinatos occurs in the
clarinet parts, and the melody is scored for flute and oboe.38 Block four, which begins two
measures before R5 starts with ostinatos in the string and piano parts with the melody presented
in the first violin part. This timbre change—from woodwinds to strings—occurs at the same
time as the shift from one block to the next. The complexity of block four’s construction is
aurally clarified by the instrumentation throughout, as the fragments and ostinatos enjoy their
own sound colors.
Stravinsky made some minor changes in his orchestration, such as adding accents and
other articulation (e.g., accents in the first several measures). In one instance (mm. 54), he splits
six eighth note E-flats into twelve sixteenth notes with different articulations and registers (see
Example 3). This change adds a complexity to the sound, and one that was probably not scored
for pianola as it would not be as audible.
…
As we have seen, Stravinsky was drawn to the reproducing piano because of the
possibility to remove the performer’s musical interpretation and ability to accurately produce
38
The study score for the Étude contains measure numbers but no rehearsal numbers, and
the orchestral score has the exact opposite. Going from the pianola edition to orchestral score,
Stravinsky rewrote some of the time signatures. In this regard it is challenging to refer to
measure numbers in the orchestral score, as they do not correspond to measure numbers in the
study score. It is equally challenging to provide rehearsal numbers in the study score, as they are
not printed in the music.
A good example occurs at measure 62 of the study score, and one measure before R11 in
the orchestral edition. In the study score, the eighth notes after the scale are in a single 2/4
measure, the triplet turn is in a single 3/8 measure, and beginning of block five starts out 5/8, 3/8,
6/8. In the orchestral edition, the eighth notes are combined with the triplet turn in a 3/4 bar.
Block five begins at R11 with a 9/8 measure before meeting the study score in 6/8. This is a
logical change as the phrasing of the cadence really occurs in 3/4 and is more clear for live
musicians.
Kermit-Canfield 19
Example 3: Measure 54 of Etude pour pianola as written in the study score and as
played by the first violin in “Madrid.”
rhythms and chords impossible for a human performer to play. He also wrote for the instrument
for financial reasons. Robert Craft points out that Stravinsky’s contract with Pleyel was
probably worth between $2,000 and $4,000 annually in a time period where the average worker’s
income would have been closer to $600.39 Unfortunately, the pianola was musically too limited
as an instrument, and soon after receiving Ansermet’s letter in June 1919 Stravinsky ceased
writing for the pianola
Today, the player piano concept still exists in several forms. In the most traditional
sense, instruments such as Yamaha’s Disklavier and Bösendorfer’s CEUS have replaced
traditional roll-operated player pianos with their modern day equivalent. These pianos operate
through MIDI interfaces, and store their music on CDs, 3.5 inch Floppy Disks, or flash
memory.40 In addition to having improved features, such as the ability to record and play back
music instantly and store many more scores (without the hassle of loading and rewinding rolls)
than a traditional player piano, modern player pianos sound better and perform more fluently
39
Igor Stravinsky and Robert Craft, Conversations with Igor Stravinsky (Garden City,
NY: Doubleday and Company, 1959), 164.
40
MIDI stands for “Musical Instrument Digital Interface,” and is a digital protocol for
digital instruments and computers to communicate and send instructions to each other. For more
information on MIDI, see “General MIDI Specifications,” MIDI Manufacturers Association,
http://www.midi.org/techspecs/gm.php.
Kermit-Canfield 20
Figure 2: First 10 measure of Etude pour pianola viewed in the piano roll editor of
Cubase. Just like a pianola’s piano roll, the position and length of the black bars
represent pitch and rhythm. The skinny vertical bars at the bottom of the window
represent dynamics and articulations.
than roll-operated instruments.41 Modern music software has also adopted the term “piano roll”
to refer to MIDI editors that appear in programs such as Apple’s Logic and Steinberg’s Cubase
(see Figure 2). These editors are not only visually attractive, but informative, easy to use, and
able hold much information about each note (e.g., pitch, dynamic level, articulation, instrument
etc.) allowing a composer much flexibility in the compositional process.
What would Stravinsky’s reaction have been to MIDI powered player pianos and
software editors? I believe his opinions would be mixed—both in adoration of the power of
computer processing and fervently against computer aided composition. We have seen that
Stravinsky always wanted to be on the cusp of technology, from his initial adoption of the
41
Naturally, modern player pianos are rare to find and just as challenging to repair as
older instruments.
Kermit-Canfield 21
pianola to his early use of recording technologies. Stravinsky turned to mechanical instruments
and recording his music as a means to remove variability from performances of his work.
Unfortunately for Stravinsky, these early technologies were not particularly good. Modern
computers would have given Stravinsky the absolute control he wanted and the ability to produce
precisely the sounds he wanted without the inconsistency of live performers.
While Stravinsky was critical of early music technology (music concrete and
elektronische musik), he hinted that it was still early in its development:
I would still repeat the criticisms I made of it [electronic music] two years ago—namely,
I do not see why a medium so rich in sound possibilities should sound so poor…At the
same time the newer electronic music has more direction…the whole electronic music
experiment set up to the present can only be regarded as a pre-natal stage in its
development.42
He continues by mentioning how he thinks electronic music is suited for use in the theatre.
Although Stravinsky’s compositional output includes so many ballets, he never followed this
idea through. I believe it is because Stravinsky was strongly independent and using computer aid
in his compositional process would have been akin to admitting his own compositional failure.
While Stravinsky only wrote a single piece for the pianola, the Étude pour pianola is
brilliantly constructed and is a pivotal composition both for its predictive and backward looking
elements. Stravinsky’s relationship with the instrument lasted over fifteen years, and his income
from the Pleyel company made it possible for him to support his family and compose other
pieces. Always at the cusp of technology, Stravinsky adopted the pianola as a way to achieve
perfect performances of his work and later abandoned it when it proved to be less successful than
he had hoped in favor of the phonograph.
42
Igor Stravinsky and Robert Craft, Stravinsky in Conversation with Robert Craft (New
York: Penguin, 1962), 228–230.
Kermit-Canfield 22
References
Carr, Maureen. After the Rite: Stravinsky’s Path to Neoclassicism from 1914 to 1925. Oxford
University Press.
Carr, Maureen, ed. Stravinsky’s Histoire Du Soldat: A Facsimile of the Sketches. New York: A-R
Editions, 2005.
Colles, et al., H.C. “Evans, Edwin.” Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online.
http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/09101.
Cross, Jonathan. The Stravinsky Legacy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Press, 1998.
Crutchfield, Will. “Interpretations of Stravinsky Pianola Rolls.” New York Times. New York,
May 29, 1988.
Evans, Edwin. “Pianola Music.” Musical Times 62, no. 945 (November 2921): 761–764.
“General MIDI Specifications.” MIDI Manufacturers Association. http://www.midi.org
/techspecs/gm.php.
“History of the Pianola: An Overview.” The Pianola Institute. http://www.pianola.org/history
/history.cfm.
Holland, Frank. “Pianola.” Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online (March 8, 2012).
Lawson, Rex. “Etude Pour Pianola by Igor Stravinsky.” Pianola Journal 5 (1993): 4–22.
———. “Igor Stravinsky and the Pianola.” Rex Lawson - Concert Pianolist.
http://www.rexlawson.com/index.html?contents.html&0.
———. “Stravinsky and the Pianola (Part 2).” Pianola Journal 2 (1989): 2–16.
———. Stravinsky: The Rite of Spring and Petrushka. New York: Nimbus, 1991.
———. “What Is a Concert Pianolist?” Rex Lawson - Concert Pianolist. http://www.rexlawson.
com/index.html?contents.html&0.
McFarland, Mark. “Stravinsky and the Pianola: A Relationship Reconsidered.” Revue De
Musicologie 97, no. 1 (2011): 84–109.
Ord-Hume, Arthur. “Player Piano.” Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online (2007).
Reynolds, Reginald. “A Note on the Technique of Recording.” Pianola Journal 7 (1994): 36–38.
Kermit-Canfield 23
Simeone, Nigel. “Review: Stravinsky Les Noces (arr. Pianola by Stravinsky and Larmanjat) and
Other Music for Pianola, by Rex Lawson (Pianola), Aeolus 101.” Pianola Journal 12
(1999): 53–54.
Stravinsky, Igor. An Autobiography. New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1936.
Stravinsky, Igor, and Robert Craft. Conversations with Igor Stravinsky. Garden City, NY:
Doubleday and Company, 1959.
———. Stravinsky in Conversation with Robert Craft. New York: Penguin, 1962.
Stravinsky, Igor. Quatre Etudes Pour Orchestre. New York: Boosey and Hawkes, 1952.
“The Reproducing Piano: An Overview.” The Pianola Institute. http://www.pianola.org
/reproducing/reproducing.cfm.
Toch, Ernst. “On Writing for the Mechanical Piano.” Pianola Journal 1 (1987): 36–40.
Van den Toorn, Pieter. The Music of Igor Stravinsky. New York: Yale University Press, 1983.
Walsh, Stephen. Stravinsky: A Creative Spring, Russia and France, 1882-1934. New York:
Knopf, 1999.
———. “Stravinsky’s Symphonies: Accident or Design?” In Analytical Strategies and Music
Interpretation: Essays on Nineteenth- and Twentieth-century Music. New York:
Cambridge University Press, 1996.
———. The Music of Stravinsky. New York: Claredon Press, 1988.