David Tudor in the Late 1980s: Understanding a Secret Voice

Author(s): D'Arcy Philip Gray

Source: Leonardo Music Journal, Vol. 14, Composers inside Electronics: Music after David
Tudor (2004), pp. 41-47
Published by: The MIT Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1513504 .
Accessed: 12/11/2013 10:46
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The MIT Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Leonardo Music Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 170.210.73.13 on Tue, 12 Nov 2013 10:46:55 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

David

Tudor

in

the

Late

a
Secret
Understanding

1980s:
Voice

D 'ArcyPhilip Gray

lT

hemid-to-late
1980s
wasanimportant
timefor

the field of electronic music. The groundwork was being laid

for the migration from tape machines to personal computers,
MIDI had recently been established as an industry standard
and a group of people in Paris were developing a new computer music program (i.e. Max). Meanwhile, David Tudor continued to work with his own brand of electronics, seemingly
unaware of the changes that were taking place around him.
Tudor's work from this period remains largely unknown to
present-day electronic musicians, which is strange, as this was
an extremely prolific stage in his career. He composed 14
known pieces: the Monnier Series (six pieces created during
1985-1986); Hedgehog(1985); Electronicswith TalkingShrimp
(1986); the WebSeries (five pieces created 1987-1988); and
VirtualFocus (1990).
These pieces can be divided into two distinct styles. The first,
as seen in the Monnier Series (with Jackie Matisse Monnier),
was his use of radar and ultrasonic devices in conjunction with
physical objects. The second, as found in the WebSeries, was
his use of a vast library of unique recordings, processed
through an elaborate network of analog electronics. My research at the Getty Research Institute (GRI) looked mainly at
the "source material pieces" from this latter category (see Appendix I for more information on the research project).
The WebSeries pieces are classics in this second style. In each
of these pieces, unique pre-recorded material evolves over time
into a huge spectrum of sounds. This spectrum is created using
a network of analog processing equipment interconnected by
a switching matrix. Critical to the Tudor method is the use of
the performance space as an instrument. For each piece, the
speaker setup involves eight units placed throughout the performance space: on their backs pointing straight up at the ceiling, hung in the air pointing down at the audience, on the
sides of the theater pointing up a wall and in any other spots
that might produce an interesting spatial effect. Tudor combined these off-axis speakers with others placed on-axis in an
effort to envelop the room.
In this article I will try to shed light on the mysterious and
magical world of David Tudor's late work. I will use the Web
Series pieces and my 2003 reconstruction of WebIlforJohn Cage
to study Tudor's methods and discuss the problems of reconstructing and performing these works.

Radio France in Paris (the RadioABSTRACT

diffusion T(elevision Franaise or
RTF) and the Nordwest Deutscher
DavidTudor's
of
compositions
Rundfunk (NWDR) in Cologne.
thelate1980saresomewhat
These studios largely set the stanHisartistic
and
mysterious.
technical
wasunique
approach
dards for early development in the
andcanbe seenas a precursor
new medium of electronic music.
to muchoftheunderground
In North America, John Cage was
noiseandavant-rock
musicthat
thealternative
club
working with magnetic tape as well
permeates
scenetoday.Theauthor
uses
(e.g. WilliamsMix [1952]). He soon
Tudor's
Webpiecesto explore
became keenly interested, however,
his
later
his
work,studying
in adapting many of these studio
andthepossibility
methodology
for
live
techniques
performance.
of reconstructing
hissystems.
Along with Tudor and others connected to the Gate Hill Co-op in
Stony Point, New York,Cage began
to use electronic equipment onstage [1]. Cage's Cartridge
Music
(1960) is a landmark early example of this work.
Tudor had been collaborating extensively with Cage since
the early 1950s [2]. In 1964, he composed his first piece for
live electronics, FluorescentSound, for a Robert Rauschenberg
Fig. 1. A D&RMultigatechops an audiosignal:(above)the original

audio signal. (below) the gated signal. The original signal is from
Tudor's Web source material. (? D'Arcy Philip Gray)

OF THEWORK
HISTORICALPLACEMENT
During the 1950s, two major electronic music studios emerged
in Europe: the Groupe de recherche de musique concrete at

!1

D'Arcy Philip Gray (musician), 6625 rue Hurteau, Montreal, Quebec, H4E 2Y7 Canada.
E-mail: <starchy@cam.org>.

? 2004 ISAST

LEONARDO

MUSIC JOURNAL,

Vol. 14, pp. 41-47,

This content downloaded from 170.210.73.13 on Tue, 12 Nov 2013 10:46:55 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2004

41

Tudor. The pieces were defined by both

a setup diagram and an indication of the
pre-recorded source material to be used.
Much of the source material was part of
a large library collected for the Pepsi
Pavilion at Expo 1970.
During this period, the close association between Tudor and Merce Cunningham continued. This relationship
had begun in 1950 and was formalized in
1953 with the creation of the Merce Cunningham Dance Company (MCDC) [11].
Many of Tudor's pieces were composed for MCDC, starting with Rainforest
(1968) and ending with Soundings:Ocean
Diary (1994). In all, 12 pieces were comfor MCDC, not including collaboFig. 2. A MaplinAuto-Wah
processesthe gated audiosignalshownin Fig. 1. (@D'ArcyPhilip posed
rative efforts with Cage (e.g. First Weekof
Gray)
June [1970]). Many of Tudor's associates
also composed for the company, includin
at
the
Moderna
Museet
nal
became
his
Its
ing Robert Ashley, John Cage, Takehisa
performance
processing
signature.
Stockholm [3]. Tudor quickly developed
influence, although indirect, can be Kosugi and Michael Pugliese [12]. Tudor
as a composer, and we can see three dis- seen, for example, in the work of Masami continued to work with MCDC, touring
tinct styles emerge during these first Akita (a.k.a. Merzbow) [8].
extensively until his health forced him to
retire in the summer of 1995.
mid-to-late
the
are:
the
These
1980s,
years.
During
1. The RainforestSeries(1968-1973),
world of electronic music began to move
which uses found objects as loud- decisively toward the use of personal
THE WEBSERIES
speakers. These objects are strate- computers for live performance. David
Tudor's Web Series consists of three
Miller
Puckette
audio
Zicarelli
and
were
workfitted
with
detachable
gically
transducers [4]. Source material is ing on Max at IRCAM; Csound contin- pieces composed in 1987-1988 and two
others that share a common instrumenselected specifically to highlight the ued to be developed into a powerful
natural characteristics of the par- composition tool at MIT Media Lab and tal setup (details to follow, below). The
ticular object.
elsewhere; Morton Subotnik, who had source material for the three main pieces
2. The large-scale environment of the been using computers for several years, is a recording of a brass, gold and crystal
Pepsi Pavilion at Expo 1970 in was then using them to track perform- spiderweb. The exact origin of this
Osaka, created by Tudor and the ers' actions (e.g. Hungers [1986]) [9].
recording is unknown, but Allan Kozinn
team at Experiments in Art and Meanwhile, Tudor was continuing to wrote the following in Tudor's New York
Technology (EAT) [5]. This series work with his own favored types of com- Timesobituary: "The instrument was a
of pieces used a 32-channel sound ponents. He did eventually explore the brass and gold spider web with a crystal
system and control structure de- use of a "computer" for his music: the spider. By touching the web with brushes,
"Neural" [10], but it was far removed
sponges, his fingers, or the spider, Tudor
signed by Gordon Mumma. Of note
is a vast library of taped source ma- from the type of machine used by Zi- produced sounds that were amplified
and sent through a computer soundterial compiled by Tudor. He con- carelli and Puckette.
As mentioned above, Tudor's work modification program" [13].
tinued to use much of this material
The reference to a "computer soundfor the rest of his career.
during this period consisted of two dis3. Untitled (1972), an example of tinct styles. First, as evident in the Mon- modification program" is mistaken, but
Tudor's work with feedback oscilla- nier Series, there were pieces that used the description of the source material, altion: the creation of sound elec- radar and ultrasonic devices. Most of though unverifiable, is both interesting
tronically without the use of any these were collaborative works with Mon- and possible. I cannot find any other refinput sources or oscillators [6]. The nier. The radar,for example, was directed erence to the web sculpture. It is thus unsetup for this piece was huge and at kite sculptures; the electronic signal known who built it, where it is now and
complicated and typifies the com- was returned and converted to an audio exactly what it looked like. Its specific use
in the piece is also mysterious, but I have
poser's search for unstable systems. frequency on Tudor's performance
None of these works used "conven- table. Tudor and Monnier also collabo- included a hypothesis below.
tional" electronic music devices. Instead, rated with video artistMolly Davies, workFollowing is a listing of the pieces that
they were a result of Tudor's unique tech- ing with video, underwater kites and make up the WebSeries:
nological and musical vision. Tudor underwater microphones.
The second style, as evident in the Web Primary Pieces
avoided state-of-the-artsynthesizers such
as the Moog or the Arp. By the mid- Series, involved distinctive recordedWebfor John Cage (1987) was commis1980s, he was using many commercial de- source material such as a brass spiderweb sioned by the WDR in Cologne for a solo
vices, but not in the manner for which sculpture or "talking"shrimp processed performance by Tudor. WebforJohn Cage
they were designed. Many of these in- through a vast array of sound-modifying is a concert-length piece (60 minutes or
struments were guitar-effects pedals that equipment. At that time, these modifiers longer).
he used as modules of his tabletop setup. were largely commercial guitar effects,
Webwork(1987) was made for the
This "table-core"[7] approach to live sig- but the interconnections were uniquely Merce Cunningham dance Shards.This

ii

42

Gray,David Tudor in the Late 1980s

This content downloaded from 170.210.73.13 on Tue, 12 Nov 2013 10:46:55 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

is a short (MCDC standard length is 30

minutes) version of WebforJohnCage.Webworkpremiered on 4 March 1987 at the
City Center Theater in New York.
WebIlforJohn Cage(1988) was created
for the Alternative Museum in New York.
It is unclear what differentiates Webfrom
WebII, but Tudor sometimes numbered
his pieces sequentially from performance
to performance; a third performance
may thus have been called WebIllforJohn
Cage. WebII was performed on 19 April
1988.

Secondary Pieces

ments were used in series or in parallel

to develop layers of sound, all based on
the original tapes. Appendix II shows the
score for this piece, indicating the setup
to be used. (The topic of Tudor's scores
is dealt with below.)
The key elements in the tabletop
setup, not including the matrix, are the
noise gate, auto filters and phase shifters.
A basic understanding of these devices is
necessary to grasp the audio-electronic
principles at work in these pieces. The
description that follows is intended only
as a guide. Appendix II includes generic
labels (e.g. "auto filter") next to certain
devices as points of reference.
Tudor used the noise gate to create interesting rhythms from the original
source. Figure 1 shows how the gate is
able to "chop" the material. Briefly
stated, the device allows only strong signals to pass through while stopping
weaker ones.
The auto filter, or envelope-controlled
filter, adds an almost vocal quality to the
sound, especially when used in conjunction with the gate. Figure 2 shows how an
auto filter can change the shape of the
input, in this case, the gated material
from the previous example.
The third element was the phase
shifter. Tudor often used this device in
series with the gate and auto filter. Fig-

ure 3 shows two different results achieved

through two different uses of the phase
shifter. Changing the order of components in the series can drastically change
the output; both options shown in Fig. 3
were available to Tudor.
The final critical aspect to Tudor's approach to live audio was found not on his
table but in the performance space itself.
His use of loudspeakers and their placement was revolutionary. The spatial positioning of sound was a compositional
technique that threaded its way through
his entire career. In short, he was using
multichannel audio long before the term
was commonly known [15]. From his
tabletop, Tudor had full control over the
spatialization of his sounds.

Haiku (1987), according to a score in the

Tudor Archive at GRI, was performed at
the Los Angeles Festival on 6 September
1987. The score is labeled "Haiku
web)." There is
(6/9/87-w/electronic
SETUP PROBLEMS
also evidence in the GRI archive indicatTwo basic problems will confront anyone
ing that Haiku (1958) was a score by
Cage, which was found by Tudor in a
trying to rebuild one of Tudor's setups.
The first is the nature of his scores, and
cookbook and performed at the Festival
the second is the limited availability of
in 1987. This lends credence to the idea
the electronic devices that were originally
that it is a realization of a Cage piece. Posused.
sibly, Tudor simply used his Websource
Tudor's scores are found in two basic
material for this performance. There is
formats: schematics and matrix maps.
no further indication that a piece entiThe schematics look similar to electronic
tled Haiku was ever composed by Cage,
encircuit diagrams but contain symbols rethere
is
a
from
1986
although
piece
titled Haikai.
ferring to effects processors. Simply put,
these are setup diagrams for his pieces.
Five Stone (1988) was made for the
Merce Cunningham dance Five Stone
Wind. This is a separate piece but has a Fig. 3. The effects of an Electro Harmonix Small Stone
phaser utilized in series with the
very close connection to the WebSeries. Auto-Wah:(above) audio signal phased after Auto-Wahprocessing. (below) audio signal
The source material is different but the phased prior to Auto-Wahprocessing. (@ D'Arcy Philip Gray)
electronic setup is identical [14]. In other
words, Tudor was able to perform both
pieces from the same setup. A single
score exists in the GRI archive, labeled
"Shards/5 Stone 3/90." (As noted above,
Shardsis the title of the MCDC dance for
which Tudor composed Webwork.)

-i?---i??-

AUDIO-ELECTRONIC
PRINCIPLES OF THE WORK
Nothing typifies Tudor's work during this
period more than the process of taking
unique pre-recorded material, changing
and layering it in real time and playing it
through a multichannel sound system.
The Webpieces are excellent examples of
this type of composition.
The processing system depends on a
central switching matrix. The custom matrix routes the input signal (i.e. the
source tape) to any processor the performer chooses. This matrix allowed
Tudor a high degree of flexibility in performance. He was able to modify the
original signal in a variety of ways using
noise gate, phase shift, strong equalization and auto filter devices. These ele-

Gray,David Tudor in the Late 1980s

This content downloaded from 170.210.73.13 on Tue, 12 Nov 2013 10:46:55 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

43

Mix 15

S-2

dl

d2 2M
d -

3 XI

16

---Mix

SW
.

MI

X
12

12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Matrix
15 16

dl
d2
d3
d4

Aux

MIXER

DSR PQ4

1234

5678

DS

ADSW
T
I/

xQ

Fig. 4. Author's schematic for his revival of David Tudor's WebIlforJohn Cagefor performance at Banff Centre, 2003. See Appendix III for explanation of abbreviations. (@ D'Arcy
Philip Gray)

Figure 4 is a schematic of my version of

WebH for John Cageas performed at the
Banff Centre in June 2003. A list of the
components shown in Fig. 4, alongside
their corresponding abbreviations, appears in Appendix III.
The second type of score, the matrix
map, is a list of electronic components to
be connected to the inputs and/or outputs of the central switching matrix. Appendix II includes my translation of a
matrix map from Tudor's original score
at GRI.
The problem with both types of score
is the cryptic, even secretive, nature of
Tudor's diagrams and abbreviations. It is
commonly known to the "Tudor Community" [16] that he was reluctant to divulge specific information regarding his
pieces. In fact, existing information (e.g.
scores, notes, etc.) on any of his pieces
can often be considered unreliable [17].
44

As for the processors themselves, one

is inevitably faced with the prospect of
substituting currently available devices
for those originally used. This process
of substitution must start with a proper
identification of the function of the original component. The Shin Ei Mute Box
(aJapanese guitar pedal from the 1970s),
for example, is a strong auto filter that
is no longer available. This device must
be replaced with another strong auto
filter.
Further study reveals that the Mute
Box is not patched through the Effect
Loop Selector (ELS). This indicates that
it received "special" treatment from
Tudor. The ELS is a switch that allows the
selection of one or another of the loops
connected through the device. (One can
select all the devices through the ELS,
but this results in a certain loss of gain
and bleeding of the signal. It is unlikely

that this would have been done to any

great extent.)
I made numerous substitutions for my
2003 Banff performance. For specific examples, please compare the component
lists in Appendices II and III. Based on
my background with the composer, his
electronic systems and his own performances, I feel that my realization of the
"score"was successful. The resulting performance bore a strong resemblance to
Tudor's own performances of the piece.
A number of attempts have been made
to reconstruct the circuitry of missing
components to Tudor's setups. Although
further discussion is outside the scope of
this paper, I will mention that bothJohn
D.S. Adams of Stonehouse Sound in
Toronto and I have made separate efforts
to rebuild the analog circuitry. Both Ron
Kuivila of Wesleyan University and Mark
Trayle of the California Institute of the
Arts have worked on digital reconstructions.
A final note on the setup: The spiderweb sculpture used to make the original
source material recordings was not necessarily part of the performance setup. It
appears on some matrix maps and not on
others. Tudor used the Neural Network
Synthesizer in a similarway (e.g. in Neural
NetworkPlus [1991]). Sometimes Tudor
included the Neural as an "extra"to his
performance. I am assuming that he
treated the web sculpture in the same
way.

PERFORMANCE
PROBLEMS
After rebuilding the setup, two problems
remain. The first of these relates to the
source material.As mentioned above, the
source material for the three principal
Webpieces is a series of recordings of
brass, gold and crystal spiderwebs. This
is not indicated in the score, but in a
handwritten program note found in the
GRI archive. In the case of these pieces,
there are also several clearly labeled tapes
and a recorded performance. As such,
the question of source material is easily
answered. Other pieces, unfortunately,
are not as clear. During my research period at GRI, I spent a significant amount
of time trying to reconstruct Tudor's
Fragments(1984). In this case, I have fully
deciphered the score, but there is no indication as to the source material. Until
this problem can be solved, the piece in
un-performable.
The second problem, not addressed by
Tudor's scores, is that of how the pieces
evolve over time. The solution to this
problem is a study of Tudor's performance practices: the context in which he

;,?a, David Tudor in the Late 1980s

This content downloaded from 170.210.73.13 on Tue, 12 Nov 2013 10:46:55 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

was composing and performing. The two

main points to consider are Tudor's long
relationships with John Cage and Merce
Cunningham and his training as a classical pianist (and organist) [18].
Tudor's performances took on a
Cagean aesthetic [19]. Tudor himself was
very concerned about creating interesting sounds-sounds that would surprise
him in performance. As such, any performance of Tudor's music must somehow address this aspect of Cage's music.
The performer must be willing to search
for interesting material. In Tudor's
words: "If I like something, I tend to let
it run itself or I see what is behind it that
could be released" [20].
In stark contrast to this motif is the influence of Tudor's classical training on
his performances. This traditional sensibility showed itself in Tudor's love of
19th-century piano repertoire-music he
often played for his own personal enjoyment during the Stony Point years-and
his tendency to occasional traditional
musical gestures [21]. Simply put, Tudor
sought to control climaxes throughout
the performance.
Somehow, the two contrasting ideas of
freedom and control are very representative of Tudor as a musician. The need
to balance them is extremely important
for anyone attempting to perform one of
his pieces. Tudor looked for instability in
his systems, and this balance of freedom
and control is yet another element of the
unstable situation. In short, he was always
looking for a complex situation in which
he could not predict the final outcome.
His efforts then proceeded in reaction to
the situation [22].
Sometimes I do something which produces an abrupt change and then I have
to decide what to do. I can incorporate
the change process and continue doing
that or I can accept the change and try to
establish (it). It all depends on how you
feel about time.... When I become master of the piece I can do things like that
quite deliberately,then we'll find out what
the natural format in time will be [23].

For the most part, the problems that

occur in performance of the WebSeries
pieces are a result of the aforementioned
complex situation. In both rehearsal and
performance, it is very difficult to keep
track of signal routing, distortion and the
need to create an interesting output. The
initial reaction of a novice might be simply to give in to the complex situation,
but Tudor's goal was alwaysto try to control the situation. If he ever fully achieved
this goal, he would change the parameters of the setup to force himself once
again into a new level of complexity. In

many ways he enjoyed the hunt as much

as the end result: "Ican't distinguish between the experiment and the performance. If I do that, I'm getting
into ... the product and there's no product here" [24].

IV (which has had numerous performances since its revival in 1996), the
NeuralSeries(performed numerous times
since 1998) and Untitled(revived byJohn
D.S. Adams in 1998). In short, this brings
us a large step closer to a body of Tudor's
work that can be heard in live performance.
ANALYSIS OF THE WORK'S
As both a pianist and as a composer,
ULTIMATE PERFORMABILITY
Tudor always worked outside the mainAt this point, the three primary WebSe- stream. While Robert Moog put together
ries pieces can be considered to be per- custom synthesizers, Tudor worked with
formable. The first performance after his phase feedback circuits. While David
Tudor's passing in 1996 was a result of Zicarelli and Miller Puckette were putmy efforts and research at GRI. This per- ting together plans to commercialize
formance of WebII for John Cage took Max, Tudor was working on his own
place on 26 June 2003 in the Rice Tele- unique systems to process his vast library
vision Studio at the Banff Centre for the of source material in real time.
Arts in the Canadian Rockies. This was a
Tudor's work as a performer is of conof
the
International
siderable
24th
presentation
importance in the context of
Audio Engineering Society Conference
mid-20th-century music. As a pianist, his
"Multichannel Audio: The New Reality." influence touched composers such as
Of the secondary pieces in the series, Cage, Christian Wolff, Karlheinz Stockthe only one that is performable is Five hausen and many others. His work in
Stone.This was performed a number of composing for unique, unstable systems
times by John D.S. Adams during should be of great value to those work1995-1996 as part of the Merce Cun- ing in the field of live electronic music
ningham Dance Company Event per- today. His influence can be seen in the
formances. Haiku remains somewhat of work of Gordon Mumma, Pauline Olia mystery. In all likelihood, this was a veros, David Behrman, Paul DeMarinis,
"one-off": something that Tudor per- Bill Viola and many other colleagues.
formed only once.
Despite this, Tudor's music has reAlthough there remains the issue of mained largely a mystery. His influence
the missing components of the original will continue to grow, given a better understanding of his systems and live persetup, replacements have been found
that are acceptable. Over time (via used formances of his music. Like that of
guitar shops, eBay, etc.), many of the Merzbow, Tudor's music has a secret
original components will be found. Ap- voice that is waiting to be exposed.
propriate to the Tudor aesthetic is the act
of exploring-even
when it comes to
Acknowledgments
shopping.
The author greatly acknowledges the support of the
The main unanswered question is: Getty Research
Institute for the Arts and Humanities
and the Canada Council for the Arts (Music and
What are the real differences between
Arts Sections) for their support in researchthe three pieces? My hypothesis is that Media
ing this material. A special acknowledgment goes to
the WebforJohn Cage pieces are simply John D.S. Adams of Toronto for his advice and suplonger versions of the piece for MCDC port.
and that the different versions of the material should be seen as one piece with a
APPENDIX I:
flexible duration.

THE RESEARCH PROJECT

Appendix I outlines my research project

LOOKING FORWARD
conducted at GRI in 2001; the abstract of
Through the process of reviving the Web my project proposal, presented to GRI in
Series pieces, I gained valuable experi- 2000, is followed by my summary report
ence in the reconstruction ofTudor's set- written at the completion of the project
(and later edited in 2003).
ups from this period. This creates the
possibility, with further research, of reviving Sextetfor Seven (1982), Fragments Abstract: 22 March 2000
(1984) and Hedgehog (1985). These
Myresearch project will focus on the elecpieces all bear some resemblance to the tronic compositions of David Tudor that
Webpieces.
are currently unperformable. Since 1995,
With a revivalof these works, there can I have been activelyinvolved in many projbe a living reference to this music in live ects relating to Tudor's music. Research
performance. Such a reference already in the GRI archives would enable me to
exists with other works, such as Rainforest produce a more complete survey of

GraW,David Tudor in the Late 1980s

This content downloaded from 170.210.73.13 on Tue, 12 Nov 2013 10:46:55 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

45

Tudor's music than presently exists. This

will make some of the most influential
work in the field of live electronic performance available to others, both within
the medium of live performance and

The numbers are the channels on the

matrix map. The left-hand list is original
label from Tudor's list, the right-hand list
is my explanation. Please note that any
input can be sent to any output using the
matrix.

APPENDIX III: BANFF2003

PERFORMANCE

Component list from author's schematic

of WebIHforJohnCagefrom the 2003 performance at the Banff Centre.
through lecture/workshops.
Figure 4 shows the importance of the
matrix.
This device allows the performer
Matrix Inputs
Summary Report
to
send
any input (left side) to any outare coming to the matrix from
Prepared by D'Arcy Philip Gray for the Signals
side). The boxes represent the
put
(right
Getty Research Institute (edited Decem- the following sources:
of the setup, mostly comcomponents
1 tape 1-left channel of source tape
ber 2003)
mercial
guitar
pedals. The lines represent
2 tape r-right channel of source tape
the patch-cords (cables) that connect the
3 mic to Korg Tone-Booster-direct
Re: David Tudor LibraryResearch Grant,
out from mixer's mic preamp to components. Each component changes
8-13 January 2001
the sound in some way. Please refer to
Korg pedal
"Audio-Electronic Principles of the
5
multigate-D&R Multigate
During the first 2 days, I made a superfiWork," earlier in this article, for exam7
Selector
ELS-Effects
Loop
cial study of the materials available to me
8 Prod-this remains unclear, but could ples of how the devices change the
of
Box
3:
Electronic
and
Work
(mostly
be a feed from the spiderweb sculp- sound.
the Finding Aid for Audio Material) in
AF-Maxxon Auto Filter
ture
order to more accurately assess the likeDisc (i.e. recorded
CD-Compact
9 TC Phaser-TC Electronics Phaser
lihood of reviving one of Tudor's comsource material)
pedal
positions. I quickly realized that there was
CS2-Boss CS2 Compressor/Sustainer
much more information that I had origD&R-D&R Multigate
Matrix Outputs
inally expected. By the third day,I was bedl-d4-Direct
outputs from Main
Signal is leaving the matrix and going to
ginning to sketch out the setup diagrams the
Mixer
sources:
following
for HedgehogandMonobird.The last 3 days
DODPh-DOD
Stereo Phaser, one
2 Multigate to Matrix-D&R Multigate
of my research were spent finalizing as
channel to main mix
9 to Mix ONE 1-1st Teac Model II
many details of all eight works as possimixer
DS-Maplin Auto Wah, output split,
ble in order to ensure a smooth transione channel to main mix
10 to Mix TWO 1-2nd Teac Model II
tion into the rehearsal/performance
FL-Panner with tone control, like
mixer
phase of the project.
11 ELS to Matrix input 7-to the Ef"FlyingPan"
The work resulted in detailed inforHE-DOD Harmonic Enhancer
fects Loop Selector, then to Matrix
mation of the following pieces: Monobird
Mix-Realistic 4 Channel Microphone
12 Mute Box to Mix TWO 4--Shin Ei
Version (1973);
(1972); Microphone--Mills
Mixer
Mute Box pedal (auto filter)
Forest Speech (1976); Fragments (1984);
MXR-MXR 10-Band Graphic Equal19 to Mix ONE 2-1st Teac Model II
Hedgehog(1985); Electronicswith Talking
izer
mixer
(1987); and Web
Shrimp(1986); Webwork
PAN-Panner (one input alternates
20 to Mix TWO 2-2nd Teac Model II
(1988).
forJohn Cage11H
between two outputs)
Mixer
All of the above pieces are close to
21 TC Phaser to Matrix-to TC ElecPQ4 Parametric Equalizer
PQ4--Boss
being performable. The goal is to revive
PS-Boss PS3 Dual Pitch Shifter
tronics Phaser pedal, then to Matrix
all of them for live performance in the
SS-Electro Harmonix Small Stone
22 TC Phaser to Mix ONE 3-to other
near future.
TC Electronics Phaser pedal
(phaser), from Direct out of Worm
SW-Realistic Channel Selector (re27-28 Auto Pan rears-2 Accessit Auto
Bibliography
Panners for channels 5-8
places ELS in Tudor's setup)
The David Tudor Papers, 1884-1998
W-Electro Harmonix Worm (phaser)
29-30 Auto Pan fronts-to other 2
(Bulk 1940-1996)
Accessit Auto Panners for channels
Series IA. Tudor, early 1940s-1994
1-4
Series IIA.General Projects, 1949-1996
Note
Series IIB. Merce Cunningham Dance Effects Loop Selector
This version of the score incorporates elements from
1 Attack EQ-Electro
Company, 1953-1996
a matrix map for Webwork
as well. Also, channels 7-8
Harmonix
on the output side of the matrix were not connected
Series III. Electronic Files, 1950s-1990s
Attack Equalizer (auto filter)
in order to simplify cabling. The numbers 1-8 on the
Series X. Audio and Visual Tapes
2 Auto Filter to Mutron-Ibanez Auto Mixer are the
main outputs; as such, they are conFilter to Mutron II (auto filter to nected to amplifiers and speakers.
phase shifter)
APPENDIX II: TUDOR'S WEBII
3 Dynamic Filter-Boss Dynamic Filter
FORJOHN CAGEMATRIX MAP
References and Notes
(auto filter)
The following is a translation of Tudor's
1. Peter Manning, Electronicand Computer
Music (Ox4 Mutron II to Auto Filter-another
original matrix map for the WebHII
perMutron II to another Ibanez Auto ford, U.K.: Clarendon Press, 1993).
formance at the Alternative Museum on
2. "Without close association with David Tudor, the
Filter
pianist, my recent work, that of the last 15 years,
19 April 1988. The original document
would be unthinkable."John Cage, in Richard Kosteis part of the Tudor Papers Archive at Mixes
lanetz, ed., John Cage:An Anthology(New York: da
GRI. See Appendix III for a list of com- Mix One: outputs to house system 1-4
Capo Press, 1970) p. 143.
ponents for the 2003 revival at the Banff
3. D'Arcy Philip Gray, "The Art of the Impossible,"
Centre.
Mix Two: outputs to house system 5-8
Musicworks,No. 69 (December 1997) pp. 18-21.

46

Gray,David Tudor in the Late 1980s

This content downloaded from 170.210.73.13 on Tue, 12 Nov 2013 10:46:55 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

4. Wendy Stern, ed., Windowon theWork:DavidTudor's

RainforestIV (New York: Lincoln Center Institute,
1998).
5. Billy Klfiver,Julie Martin and Barbara Rose, ed.,
Pavilion (New York:Dutton, 1972).
6. John D.S. Adams, "Giant Oscillations: The Birth
of Toneburst," Musicworks,No. 69 (1997) pp. 14-17.
7. 1 have adopted this term from the world of "Noise
Music." It normally refers to a musician performing
with a collection of gadgets (samplers, effects boxes,
etc.) on a table. A review by LOB (the Instagon Foundation) shows the term in its natural habitat: "Next
up was JOHN WIESE who pulled no punches and
left no surprizes with his signature over the top bombastic harsh electronics.. . lots of knob turning
and toggle fondling.., .pure ripping table-core."
See <http://www.tif.org/caution/soundreviews3.
htminl>.
8. "Armed with an arsenal of battered electronic
equipment, broken guitars, and defective tape
recorders, Akita began to explore the possibilities of
using feedback instead of musical notation to create
music-by tapping into the 'secret voice, the unconscious libido' of the equipment and controlling
it." Edwin Pouncey, "Consumed by Noise," The Wire,
No. 198 (August 2000) p. 30.
9. Joel Chadabe, ElectricSound: ThePast and Promise
ofElectronicMusic (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice
Hall, 1997) p. 219.
10. "In 1989-1990 Tudor was approached by Forrest
Warthman and a group of engineers from Intel
(most notably Mark Holler). The result was the
Neural Network Synthesizer (familiarly known as
the Neural), a customized collection of neural network microchips that can process many signals in
parallel, not unlike the human brain." See Gray [3]
p. 21.
11. Susan Sontag, ed., Dancerson a Plane (London:
Anthony D'Offay Gallery, 1989).
12. Tudor's pieces for MCDCwere: Rainforest(1968)
for MCDC's RainForest;Toneburst(1975) for Sound-

dance; Weatherings(1979) for Exchange; Phonemes

(1981) for Channels/Inserts;Sextetfor Seven(1982) for
for Phrases;Webwork
(1987)
Quartet;Fragments(1984)
for Shards;Five Stone (1988) for Five StoneWind; Virtual Focus (1990) for Polarity; Neural NetworkPlus
(1991) for Enter; Untitled 1975/1994 (1994) for revival of Sounddance; and Soundings: Ocean Diary
(1994) for Ocean.

19. "In 1952, with Morton Feldman, Christian Wolff,

Earle Brown, and David Tudor, I had taken steps to
make a music that was just sounds, sounds free of
memory and tastes ... sounds free of fixed relations
between two or more of them .... "John Cage, M:
Writings'67-'72 (Hanover, NH: Wesleyan Univ\ Press,
1973) p. xiii.

13. Allan Kozinn, "DavidTudor, 70, Electronic Composer, Dies," New YorkTimes,15 August 1996, sec. D,
p. 23.

Manuscriptreceived25 December2003.

20. David Tudor, transcript of question-and-answer

Other works for MCDC during the late 1980s insession with audience members on 29 September
cluded: John King: Gliss in Sighs (1985) for Native
1985. This was a pre-concert talk before a perforGreen;Emanuel Dimas de Melo Pimenta: ShortWaves mance of Hedgehogfor Mobius in Boston. A record(1985) for Fabrications;Takehisa Kosugi: Assemblage ing of both the talk and the performance can be
(1985) for Grange Eve, John Cage: VoicelessEssay found in the GRI archive.
(1986) for Points in Space;Takehisa Kosugi: Rhap21. Rogalsky [17].
sody (1987) for Carousal;Robert Ashley: Problemsin
theFlying Saucer(1988) for Eleven;Ivan Tcherepnin:
22. Peter Zaparinuk, "David Tudor's Performance
The CreativeAct (1989) for Field and Figures;Michael
Composition," Musicworks,No. 71 (1998) pp. 47-51.
Pugliese: Peace Talks (1989) for August Pace;John
Cage: SculpturesMusicales(1989) for Inventions;and
23. Tudor [20].
Takehisa Kosugi: Spectra(1989) for Cargo-X.SeeJohn
D.S. Adams, "MCDCMusic/Dance Chronology," un24. Tudor [20].
published, circa 1994.

14. John D.S. Adams, Tudor's assistant, friend and

collaborator in the early 1990s, indicates that the
source material for Five Stonerelied heavily on seismic recordings of underground earthquakes.
15. More information can be found in Gray [3].
16. This term refers to a loose collection of individuals, including members of Composers Inside Electronics, members of the Merce Cunningham Dance
Company, friends, collaborators and other people
whose lives were directly touched by Tudor.
17. Matt Rogalsky,"DavidTudor's Virtual Focus,"Musicworks,No. 73 (1999) pp. 21-23.
18. I use the term "classical"in the generic sense of
"classical music," not music from the Classical Period. The term implies traditional Western conservatory training.

D 'ArcyPhilip Grayperformsregularsoloand
chambermusic concertsin various parts of
Canadaas a percussionistand electronicmusician. From 1993 to 1995 Grayperformed
regularlywiththeMerceCunninghamDance
CompanyofNew York,wherehebeganto work
closelywith David Tudor In 1998, he took
part in a revivalof Tudor'sRainforest IV at
theLincoln Centerin New York.Since 1998,
he has beena memberof theMotionEnsemble
In recentmonthshe has given
(Fredericton).
solo performancesin Holland, Germany,
Montreal,and at the Banff Centre,and released a recordingofJohn Cage'smusicfor
Mode recordsin New York.His next project
will incorporate
feedbacksystemswithgestural
controllers.

Gray,David Tudor in the Late 1980s

This content downloaded from 170.210.73.13 on Tue, 12 Nov 2013 10:46:55 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

47