The Art of Tango [1 ed.] 1138392065, 9781138392069

Citation preview

The Art of Tango

The Art of Tango offers a systematic exploration of the performance, arrangement and composition of the universally popular tango. The author discusses traditional practices, the De Caro school and the pioneering oeuvre of four celebrated innovators: Pugliese, Salgán, Piazzolla and Beytelmann. With an in-depth focus on both reception and practice, the volume and its companion website featuring supplementary audio-visual materials analyze, decode, compare and discuss literature, scores and recordings to provide a deeper understanding of tango’s artistic concepts, characteristics and techniques. River Plate tango is explored through the lens of artistic research, combining the study of oral traditions and written sources. In addition to a detailed examination of the various approaches to tango by the musicians featured in this book, three compositions by the author embodying creative applications of the research findings are discussed. The volume offers numerous tools for developing skills in practice, inspiring new musical output and the continuation of research endeavours in the field. Illustrating the many possibilities of this musical language that has captivated musicians and audiences worldwide, this book is a valuable resource for everyone with an interest in tango, whether they be composers, performers, arrangers, teachers, music lovers or scholars in the field of popular music studies. Bárbara Varassi Pega, PhD, is an Argentinian pianist, arranger, composer, researcher and educator specialized in tango music. Currently based in the Netherlands, she teaches at Codarts University of the Arts, Rotterdam, and Fontys University of Fine and Performing Arts, Tilburg.

The Art of Tango

Bárbara Varassi Pega

First published 2021 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2021 Bárbara Varassi Pega The right of Bárbara Varassi Pega to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by her in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been requested ISBN: 978-1-138-39206-9 (hbk) ISBN: 978-0-429-42238-6 (ebk) Typeset in Times New Roman by Apex CoVantage, LLC

For Pato and Virgilio, whose love and generosity have graced my life.

Contents

Preface Acknowledgements List of Abbreviations The companion website for The Art of Tango

x xiii xvi xviii

1 Introduction

1

2 Stylistic norms of tango music – its main materials and techniques

9

The model 10 What is tango music and what is it made of? 11 Creating and re-creating tango music 20 The available scores 21 3 Boedo and the De Caro school

22

Boedo 23 The De Caro school 28 4 Osvaldo Pugliese – his life, musical style and orchestra and his contribution to instrumental tango music Introduction 30 El andariego 36 La mariposa 43 Negracha 49 A los artistas plásticos 62 Chapter review and additional remarks 65

30

viii Contents 5 Horacio Salgán – his life, musical style and ensembles and his contribution to instrumental tango music

70

Introduction 70 Don Agustín Bardi 76 Gran Hotel Victoria 95 Homenaje a Pedro Laurenz 101 Chapter review and additional remarks 105 6 Astor Piazzolla – his life, musical style and ensembles and his contribution to instrumental tango music

112

Introduction 112 Milonga del ángel 119 Tres minutos con la realidad 127 Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi 139 Adiós Nonino 146 Chapter review and additional remarks 159 7 Gustavo Beytelmann – his life, musical style and ensembles and his contribution to instrumental tango music

167

Introduction 167 Otras voces 172 Encuentro 182 Preludio n. 1 187 La bordona 191 Chapter review and additional remarks 202 8 Mendizábal’s El entrerriano – comparative analysis of arrangements by Pugliese, Salgán and Piazzolla

209

Formal structure 211 Accompanimental models 213 Orchestration 214 Melodic features 215 9 The impact of this artistic research on my own music Pin 217 Al artesano 220 Más, muchísimo más 224 Chapter review and additional remarks 227

216

Contents 10 Summary and outlook

ix 230

Summary 231 Outlook 239 Bibliography Index

241 246

Preface

The Art of Tango is the result of several years of extensive work, both artistic and theoretical, directed towards exploring the art of creating, re-creating and performing tango music. Based on materials from my PhD artistic research, Creating and Re-creating Tangos: Artistic Processes and Innovations in Music by Pugliese, Salgán, Piazzolla and Beytelmann,1 it provides systematic information on how tango is created, performed and transformed, both in traditional practice and in the pioneering oeuvre of four celebrated innovators of tango: Osvaldo Pugliese, Horacio Salgán, Astor Piazzolla and Gustavo Beytelmann, with an insight into the innovative work of Julio De Caro, their direct musical predecessor. The Art of Tango draws on a diverse range of sources that proved enlightening for my research, and all are listed in the Bibliography. Luckily, in the last few years, new sources that focus on tango music proper are appearing, and, although most books and articles dealing with tango until recently focus on historical or biographical aspects, several published interviews with the musicians featured here and others have also proven to be useful. Even when the artists themselves do not explicitly state much regarding their way of composing and arranging tangos, some interviews provide invaluable information about their professional lives and opinions about their own music and tango in general. In this respect, the interviews I personally conducted in my homeland Argentina and in Europe, both for my Master’s artistic research thesis (2009) and for the present work, produced crucial pieces of information while allowing me to come into even closer contact with the world of tango. I was fortunate enough to be able to discuss many of Beytelmann’s pieces directly with the composer himself, several features of Salgán’s music with his son César (who has continued his father’s quintet) and certain issues regarding Pugliese and Piazzolla’s oeuvre with musicians who played side by side with them or knew them well (Leopoldo Federico, Néstor Marconi, Nicolás Lavallén, Atilio Stampone, Mauricio Marcelli, Raúl Garello and Beytelmann, among others). The ethnographic research for this project, especially in Argentina, was a privilege of immense value and gave me the chance to meet kind and generous people and listen to fantastic anecdotes and music while embracing the world of tango from many different angles. Consulting tango musicians first-hand has provided me with crucial insights and information for my research, while working together with researchers and Western

Preface xi art music composers who were not familiar with the language of tango was equally essential. With the help of the former, I was able to define a specific vocabulary and to formulate clear and objective explanations and conceptualizations. The latter sharpened my perception for musical materials and techniques that I could later discover in the tangos studied, enabling me to consolidate my views through experimenting with different kinds of materials and techniques alien to the tango tradition. Apart from the data drawn from existing media and literature, all other information presented in this volume is original and is the result of my engagement with – and reflections on – tango music in two interlinked domains: my practice as a pianist, arranger and composer and the theoretical work from many years of artistic research, with musical analysis as its core method. Many of the pieces included in this book are part of the repertoire I have played since I was young, as are many other compositions and arrangements by the selected masters and others. In addition, playing with tango musicians of both the present and older generations has provided me with a unique, first-hand insight into distinctive features and tricks of tango and into the stories behind this music: many clues are actually passed on through oral tradition, and much knowledge lies in and behind its shared codes (including language). Altogether, I was able to access further information and explore new paths with respect and a strong sense of belonging to the genre and its culture. The Art of Tango focuses exclusively on instrumental music. Although some of the pieces featured here had lyrics in their original version, they will be studied in their instrumental arrangements with little or no reference to the lyrics. Aspects related to dance, poetry, literature, cinema, visual arts and other artistic expressions that are part of the tango universe are not included, nor are other related aspects such as fashion, design, merchandising, Argentina’s history and development, politics, etc. Biographical, historical and social references are aimed at complementing the main subject of this volume (the creation, re-creation and performance of instrumental tango by the four previously mentioned composers) and as such make no claim to be exhaustive. The volume is organized as follows: Chapter 1, ‘Introduction’, contextualizes the research, the musicians studied and tango music in general while providing a brief historical overview of the genre and establishing a connection with the current situation of the subject being analyzed. Chapter 2 introduces the main stylistic norms of tango music and the terms used in this book with explanatory annotations, including score excerpts, quotes and notes regarding the aspects dealt with in the subsequent chapters. This is necessary in order to establish tango’s constituent elements and techniques – facilitating a better understanding of their distinct use in the hands of Pugliese, Salgán, Piazzolla and Beytelmann – as well as to exemplify the innovations they introduced. Chapter 3 provides an insight into the innovative work of Julio De Caro, the direct musical predecessor of the four musicians studied here.

xii

Preface

The main body of this volume is laid out in four main chapters, with each chapter devoted to a different artist: Osvaldo Pugliese (Chapter 4), Horacio Salgán (Chapter 5), Astor Piazzolla (Chapter 6) and Gustavo Beytelmann (Chapter 7). Each of the chapters begins with a brief biography, continues with an analysis of the selected pieces and ends with a concise summary of the musical materials and techniques analyzed within those pieces. All music examples in the figures are identified with a time code for easy reference to the complete versions of the pieces accessible through the companion website. Chapter 8 features a comparative analysis of a traditional tango, El entrerriano, composed by Rosendo Mendizábal. It examines different arrangements made by three of the musicians under research (Pugliese, Salgán and Piazzolla) to further highlight their distinct approaches to the same musical material. Chapter 9 discusses three works I composed in the light of the findings and as a direct result of experimenting with the materials found through this artistic research. This is designed to show how tango’s main features and techniques can be used in different ways and for original creations through the same process of analysis, reflection and experimentation described in previous sections. Hopefully, readers will be able to replicate this approach by using the materials and techniques described in this volume for their own creations and research. Finally, a closing chapter (Chapter 10) is devoted to general conclusions about the information presented and explained in the main body of the text. It provides a detailed view of musical development and techniques in tango as well as of the innovations and different approaches to its constituent elements by the musicians featured in this volume. Altogether, The Art of Tango draws upon multiple perspectives to address tango compositions and arrangements in a comprehensive way, allowing readers to gain a deeper understanding of the art of creating, re-creating and performing tango, an overall, chronological view of the development of the genre and its techniques and insight into the various constituent features defining the stylistic traits of each composer under research. In turn, this newly acquired knowledge will hopefully enrich readers’ skills in arranging, composing and performing their own tango music. As Beytelmann states (personal interview, March 2011) in regard to his own musical experience, quoting Argentinian writer Jorge Luis Borges: ‘It is everyone’s duty to find their own voice within language’.2 The search for my own voice has been essential to this project.

Notes 1 Undertaken within the framework of the docARTES programme at the Orpheus Institute, Ghent, Belgium, and fulfilled at the Academy of Creative and Performing Arts, Faculty of Humanities, Leiden University, the Netherlands (December 2014). 2 Unless otherwise noted, all quotes (both from material sources and from personal interviews) have been translated into English by Patricia Labastié and myself.

Acknowledgements

One of the rewards of working on the artistic research resulting in this book was the opportunity it gave me to meet so many exceptional people. During these intense and challenging years I was not alone but accompanied by an extended team of experts, musicians, colleagues, friends and family. For this, I am grateful and would like to offer my sincere thanks here.

Codarts research fund The final edition of The Art of Tango and the labour required to transform the original dissertation into a book with a companion website was supported financially by the Research Fund of Codarts University of the Arts, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, an institution at which I have not only completed my Master studies but also currently have the pleasure to work as an artistic research coach for the Master programme in Music, as coordinator of the Tango Department, and as the coordinator of the module Music World Wide in the Bachelor. Special thanks to Henrice Vonck, chair Research Fund; Micha Hamel, coach for my project; Leo Vervelde and Gustavo Beytelmann, expert advisors. In 1993, Dr. Joep Bor, then director of the World Music Department that he had created at Codarts University of the Arts, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, appointed Osvaldo Pugliese as Honorary Artistic Director of the Argentine Tango chair, with Leo Vervelde and Carel Kraayenhof as main teachers. Since 1996, this chair has been held by Maestro Gustavo Beytelmann. It has been my great honour to have both Mr. Bor and Mr. Beytelmann on my team, and I am truly grateful for their invaluable contribution.

The docARTES team Frans de Ruiter and Dr. Joep Bor were the supportive and generous directing supervisors of the artistic research from which this volume is crafted. Gustavo Beytelmann has been an invaluable support as an artistic specialist during the many years I have devoted to tango studies and artistic research, first for my Master studies and later for my PhD. Many concepts and ideas presented in this book derive from my work with him; his experience and deep knowledge

xiv Acknowledgements of the tango language have been consistently both useful and inspiring for my own arrangements, compositions, research and performance. His artistic feedback to my music has proven to be enlightening and lasting pieces of advice. Dr. Edgardo ‘Chino’ Rodríguez’s contributions have been essential for my research. Discovering a professor with extensive knowledge of tango music – even playing, arranging and performing it – who was an expert in musical analysis as well as a researcher and, most importantly, willing to join the project, felt like a fortuitous dream. He helped me with the difficult task of transforming my sometimes convoluted and passionate ideas and intuitions into clear and objective conceptualizations and analyses. I would like to express my appreciation here to the entire docARTES team for their outstanding work within the realm of artistic research.

Collaborators Dr. Henrice Vonck, because of whom my whole journey with artistic research began, has thus indelibly impacted my artistic and professional journey. Omar García Brunelli from the Instituto Nacional de Musicología ‘Carlos Vega’, Buenos Aires, Argentina, provided precious pieces of information and material. His profound knowledge of tango was invaluable during many stages of my work. Leo Vervelde and Wim Warman, director and teacher, respectively, of the Tango Department at Codarts University of the Arts, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, provided me with free access to the transcriptions and scores in their archives and offered me useful information. Composers Giacomo Platini and Dr. Jacopo Baboni Schilingi from the Conservatoire de musique, de danse et d’art dramatique du Pays de Montbéliard, France, gave me an in-depth look at a wide variety of techniques and processes that can be found within the practice of classical Western art music composition. These insights brought me to a better understanding of music in general, tango music in particular, and how to apply my research findings into my own pieces and arrangements. Their help has been indispensable to my creative process. Sam Wamper was an excellent harmony and counterpoint advisor during the span of my research project. Composers Ethan Braun and Brendan Faegre offered experienced help with the technical English vocabulary used in this volume. Javier Martínez Lo Re, conductor of the Orquesta Escuela de Tango de la ciudad de Rosario, Argentina, provided useful pieces of information, scores and arrangements. My dear cousin and talented artist Mauricio Martínez drew all the illustrations for this book as well as for the companion website. Patricia Labastié, my soul friend, was a tremendous support, always ready to give advice and encouragement. She helped me with the translation of all original Spanish texts into English and performed the initial copyediting of the final version of this volume. She also assisted with the arduous and time-consuming task of seeking permissions for the text sources cited in this book. She has graced my life with the greatest acts of generosity I have ever experienced.

Acknowledgements xv Matthias Müller, translator, musician and friend, did a thorough and dedicated job with the complete intermediate English editing of this volume, and Sharon Stewart did an amazing job with the final copyediting and proofreading of this book. Much gratitude to the Tango Tinto ensemble and other musicians who tried out and performed my pieces over the course of these years, offering useful advice and encouragement, and special thanks to Gerardo Agnese, Virgilio Monti and Vincenzo Albini. Kristin Wendland performed a review of this volume and offered her advice for its publication as well as useful remarks and suggestions for the final manuscript. Guillermo Copello and Mihai Gui provided exceptional professional help with transcribing, improving or formatting some of the figures used both in the book and on the companion website. Other people I would like to thank here for various reasons include: Julián Peralta, Hüseyin Badilli, Álvaro Rovira Ruiz and Mirre Valkenburg, Charlotte Dupuis, Wobbe Kuiper, Kiki Kossmann, Mauricio Martínez (Jr.), Martina Angelino Catella, Juliano Abramovay, Matías Pedrana, Elisabetta Gri, Federico Monjeau, Esther Van Fenema, Santiago Cimadevilla, Janine Krueger, Verónica D’Amore, Maurizio Maioli, Claudio Constantini, Mark Wyman, Ruzana Tsymbalova, Víctor Villena, Alejandro Schwartz, Francesco Bruno, Lucas Guinot, Anahid Khatcheressian, Micha Molthoff, Alicia Alonso Baeza, Victoria Koduss and Gustavo Cabrera. Last but not least, I would like to express my gratitude to family and friends both in Argentina and Europe for their love and support. Special thanks to Fanny Hagmeier, who opened up a new dimension of life to me, and to Virgilio Monti, who accompanied me with loving care and wholehearted support during so many years of work, also helping with the figures used in this book.

Abbreviations

In scores and tables Acc. base: accompanimental base Accomp.: accompaniment Arreb.: arrebatado Articul.: articulation Augment.: augmentation b.: bars Band., Bnd., Bd.: bandoneon Bar #’s: bar numbers Bdg.: bridge Cdas.: strings Conv./div.: convergency/divergency Counter.: counterpoint or countermelody D.B., d.b., db, bs: double bass Guit., Gt., Gtr: guitar Homo-rhy. tutti: homorhythmical tutti Homoph.: homophony Instr.: instrumentation/instrumental Maj.: major Max.: maximum Mel.: melody Mel. w/acc.: melody with accompaniment Mil.: milonga Min.: minor Modul.: modulation Pno., Pn., P.no: piano Polyph.: polyphony Qty.: quantity Rhythm.: rhythmical Sect.: section Sub-sect., Sub-s.: sub-section S-W: strong-weak

Abbreviations xvii Symm.: symmetrical Sync.: syncopation T.L.: textural layer Ton.: tonality Var.: variation, variación V.cello: violoncello Vibr.: vibraphone Vln., Vl.: violin Ymb: yumba

Chords and tonalities This volume adopts the American system of chord abbreviation, that is: capital letters with an added ‘m’ in the case of a minor chord (A and Am, for example, refer to A major and A minor, respectively). Tonalities are written in full: C♯ major, B♭ minor, for example. In the reduced space available in many of the diagrams, tonalities may also be referred to with the abbreviation of their tonic chord (e.g. Dm or D-m would indicate D minor).

Pitch system This volume uses the American Standard Pitch Notation proposed by the Acoustical Society of America in 1939, which is capital letters (A, B, C, etc.). No reference to register will be given unless needed, in which case it will be specified with numbers (A4 or B5, for example).

The companion website for The Art of Tango

www.artoftango.info Password: tLaUngAo3! The companion website for The Art of Tango is designed to supplement the printed book with additional musical examples and multimedia resources. It aims at supplying readers with the necessary tools to follow the analyses presented in its printed version as well as enriching the learning process. The website has an explicitly practical orientation and includes online material such as: • • • • •

listening charts with a time code for easy reference to the complete versions of the pieces; tables presenting the formal structure and main features of some of the pieces discussed in the book; (annotated) score excerpts; links to musical examples and videos; downloadable PDF versions of the full pieces that I composed in light of the findings of the artistic research that led to this book.

Please keep in mind that you will need to have a Spotify account to access the music tracks on Spotify. Signing up is simple and free of charge. Make sure you are already logged in before clicking the links to Spotify on the companion website so that you will be directed immediately to the correct track. The material presented on the companion website is limited to the permissions obtained, and therefore a sharing of full scores, videos and audio tracks was not always possible. However, through the links and reference materials made available here, I have aimed to provide as full and complete a learning environment as possible, when combined with the printed book.

1

Introduction Bárbara Varassi Pega

Tango music as we know it today is the result of the artistic work of several great twentieth-century musicians. Very few of them, however, expressed themselves explicitly regarding the musical influences, innovative concepts and ideas implicit in their music, and only partial information concerning the elements and techniques of composing, arranging and performing tango has been documented and made available so far. Tango enjoys an ever-expanding practice and popularity, nowadays one of the most widely known world music genres; yet, there is still little practical knowledge available regarding its creation, re-creation and performance. In order to shed light on these aspects and offer a deeper understanding of what tango music consists of – both in traditional practice and in the hands of the musicians studied in this book, namely Osvaldo Pugliese, Horacio Salgán, Astor Piazzolla and Gustavo Beytelmann as well as insights into the work of their direct musical predecessor, Julio De Caro – this volume presents an examination of tango’s constituent elements and techniques alongside a discussion of related compositional, arrangement and performance practices. The whole is explored and delivered from the author’s role as both a musicologist and a tango musician (composer-arranger-performer), its uniqueness precisely being the dual approach

2

Introduction

to the subject matter from a scholarly and a practical point of view. This results not only in an outstanding contribution to the field but also in a concrete, practical example of how the genre’s history can be transformed by a new generation of musicians as well as used as a guide towards new creations and practice. What are the core musical features and techniques that define River Plate tango as a model, and which innovations can be traced in the oeuvre of the musicians studied here in relation to that model? How can musicians explore tango’s constituent elements and techniques to inform their practice as performers, arrangers and composers? How can making explicit the innovative concepts and ideas implicit in the musical output of the musicians discussed here serve as a guide for a deeper understanding of tango music that might lead to its further advance? The Art of Tango has been written with the aim of offering thoroughly investigated answers to these questions. Focused on both reception and practice, The Art of Tango seeks to analyze, decode and discuss significant arrangements and compositions by the musicians mentioned previously in order to provide a deeper understanding of their styles as well as the artistic concepts and theoretical foundations of the genre. This is achieved by presenting readers with techniques, processes and materials to better comprehend tango’s musical language and by providing tools to develop skills in arranging, composing and performing tango, hopefully inspiring new musical output in the field. In addition, this volume offers a series of research tools that can be applied to other works by the composers dealt with here as well as others, which allows for the continuation of a research practice that has, until recently, been scarcely investigated or even fully neglected within the study of tango. The choice of tangos for the case studies in this volume is specified in each instance and was based on both the judgement of the composers themselves (when available) and my own as well as – often – public consensus. The analyses take both scores and recordings into account. Tango performances – and recordings as well – are rarely an exact reproduction of the sheet music, which is why this study pays special attention to those elements that defy notation and accounts for both written and oral practice and the tension between the two. The musical materials and techniques described in the analyses and used to break down and decode tango’s musical language are classified in relation to formal, textural, harmonic and melodic features; rhythm and meter; composition techniques (including variation techniques); orchestration and segmentation; the use of articulations, register, texture, timbral and percussive effects; performance techniques; and the relationship between the main lines and the diverse accompanimental archetypes, all studied in close observation of their relationship and interplay with each other. The same parameters and techniques – described and explained in Chapter 2 – were observed, taking into account perceptive and performative issues within all the pieces studied in order to better understand the different approaches to tango’s constituent elements by the musicians featured in this volume. It is my belief – and also the driving force behind my research and this book itself – that by breaking down the elements that build and shape tango music, we will be able to discover and understand them, their function and this rich musical

Introduction 3 language as a whole together with its wide array of possibilities for creation, recreation and performance. The same holds true for decoding the oeuvre of the aforementioned musicians, and even others, as it is about observing how they consistently used and combined all these elements and techniques in their own works – be it original compositions or arrangements – resulting in their different styles and unmistakable signatures. In order to offer a glimpse into the history of tango music and situate the four musicians studied in this volume in time, a short summary of the main periods in tango music’s development and some of its main actors are outlined in the following paragraphs. The musical influences the four musicians exerted on each other, as well as their main stylistic traits, will be thoroughly addressed in the respective chapters devoted to their music. The Guardia vieja (Old Guard) refers to the period when tango was born, the cultural movement that contributed to its creation, and its first generation of musicians, poets and dancers. Historians disagree as to the exact moment when the movement started and ended, but there is consensus that it began in the last two decades of the nineteenth century and ended between the second and third decades of the twentieth century, when it gave way to the so-called Guardia nueva (New Guard). After that, from approximately the mid-1930s to the mid-1950s, tango’s major expansion and establishment took place. Those years are usually referred to as the Época de oro (Golden Age). Tango originated at the end of the nineteenth century from an intermingling of the music of several populations who moved to the River Plate, to the ports of Montevideo (Uruguay) and Buenos Aires (Argentina) in search of work: European immigrants (who brought classical, popular and folkloric traditions), people of African descent (who brought percussive features and rhythms like the candombe) and the gaucho (the rural population, who brought their indigenous and Spanish heritage). In rather small ensembles and with instruments light enough to carry – such as the flute, guitar, accordion, mandolin and violin – they played traditional tunes from their own lands, mixing melodies, harmonies and rhythms that all contributed to the birth of the musical language of tango. Following its humble and marginalized origins, tango’s foundational elements came to be defined within the hands of musicians such as Ángel Villoldo and Eduardo Arolas. There, a new dimension of symbolic intent appeared, manifested in the drama and melancholy of the ensemble led by Eduardo Arolas. Arolas was a very influential figure, since the key musicians who forged the principal features of the Guardia nueva either played with him, listened to him, or admired him. In 1917, with the recording of the piece Mi noche triste, Carlos Gardel brought the ‘singing’ quality to tango’s melodic shape through his use of rubato, re-creating the cadence of the porteño Spanish spoken by the inhabitants of Buenos Aires. It was a groundbreaking moment, as it endowed tango with one of its most meaningful characteristics.1 Better suited to the ensemble of violins, piano and bandoneon that was consolidated by the end of the first decade of the twentieth century, this melodic character would remain thereafter a primary feature of tango music, together with the more joyful, danceable and articulated tango kind of speech with which contrasts are

4

Introduction

secured in its compositional and performative practice. According to García Brunelli (personal communication, 25 January 2018): One of the distinctive features of the Guardia nueva is the consolidation and standardization of the instrumental practice of tango. This entails a variety of aspects: the emergence of instrumentalists with formal education, the widespread use of instrumental arrangements, and the definition of distinctive interpretative styles that involve the creation of aesthetic schools. In the early 1920s, the ensemble structure including two violins, two bandoneons, piano and double bass began to be firmly established. The young musicians that consolidated the emerging movement of renewal include Carlos Vicente Geroni Flores, Osvaldo Fresedo and Juan Carlos Cobián. The three of them introduced the concept of arrangement in order to lend variety to performances and to build upon the instrumental capabilities of the musicians involved. Flores and Cobián were the first pianists to expand the possibilities of the instrument within orchestras. Indeed, with the 1920s came a period of musical expansion. While initially performance practice – primarily for dancing – built on the simple tunes mostly played by ear by musicians who often had no formal musical training or reading abilities, a radical change occurred with musicians like Osvaldo Fresedo, Juan Carlos Cobián, and Francisco and Julio De Caro. The new generations of musicians possessed increasingly developed technical and musical skills, and many of them had a classical music background. The standard sextet of two bandoneons, two violins, piano and double bass was established and then expanded (by adding bandoneons, violins and sometimes viola and violoncello) towards the orquesta típica, the most representative tango ensemble. The sextet also demanded better orchestration and arrangement strategies. The arrangements and compositions De Caro wrote for his sextet marked a turning point in the history of tango music and set the foundation which most later generations would build upon. The orquesta típica (traditional tango orchestra, generally made up of three or four bandoneons, three or four violins, viola, cello, piano and double bass) was indeed crucial in the development of this music. From the 1920s until the 1960s, but especially in the so-called Época de oro (Golden Age, the 1935s–1955s, with a peak in artistic production in the 1940s), a large number of orchestras were active in many cities in Argentina. During the ‘explosive’ 1940s, among the many ensembles and orchestras that contributed to the definitive expansion and consolidation of tango’s musical language were those led by violinist Alfredo Gobbi, bandoneonist Aníbal Troilo, pianists Carlos Di Sarli, Osvaldo Pugliese and Horacio Salgán as well as the one led by a very young bandoneonist, Astor Piazzolla. All of them developed new techniques for their instruments and approached composition and arranging in a new way, while still relying on tradition. According to Horacio Salas (2009, p. 152): Since then [the 1940s] it became frequent that musicians playing in orquestas típicas would also join symphony orchestras, since their training allowed for

Introduction 5 that. Tango was no longer something played intuitively by people whose grounding was limited, at best, to rudimentary knowledge gained in the modest music school in the neighbourhood. Now it moved in a field in which progress could only come from [musical] studies and technical solidity. Tango’s development was possible thanks to many musicians who – in addition to being greatly intuitive – shared an interest in exploring its constituent elements further. The repertoires – still mostly tailored to dancing – were enriched by a highly literary and musical quality, and there was an absolute convergence of popular taste and tango styles: singers and orchestras were the stars of the time, and tango was the most widespread music genre people would listen and dance to. New compositions and arrangements combined melodies with counterpoint, more sophisticated accompaniments and harmonies, and were on the whole more intricate than the earlier tangos. As such, musicians were forced to commit this new complex music to paper, with ensembles working in a setting similar to chamber music. This, however, in no way limited the freedom with which tango music was executed, and performative features were maintained through shared codes aimed at reproducing the aural domain in written versions that could only partly approximate their interpretation. The tacit knowledge of these intuitive musicians played a key role here. Tango orchestras acted also as ‘schools’ for young fledgling musicians and were the key spots where everything about the genre was passed on, always orally. In turn, the new generation of artists continued the process of establishing new orchestras that performed their own music. This was the origin of tango ‘styles’, the specific manners with which different artists dealt with tango materials and techniques. Thus, through sheer talent, effort and hard work, the main figures of the genre managed to develop a personal language, building upon elements inherited from the tradition. The main tango exponents in that period were performers, arrangers, composers, orchestrators and orchestra leaders all-in-one, and their contribution determined what are now the main features of instrumental tango music. It is important to note that the role of the conductor in orquestas típicas is different from that of orchestras in the Western art tradition. Tango conductors were and are part of the ensemble, and they lead the orchestra members from their own instruments (D’Arienzo was a rare and therefore noteworthy exception to this, as he indeed conducted often standing in front of his orchestra, as many videos and pictures document). This role, together with the rhythmical base of piano and double bass, is solid enough to keep the whole ensemble together and feeling the musical flow, just as in chamber music ensembles. In effect, it is in many ways comparable to the band leader in jazz, who also conducts from their instrument. Unfortunately, in the 1950s, after a flourishing period, most tango orchestras had to end their activities due to political and economic problems in Argentina. As a result of the ongoing financial crisis, cultural and social activities were drastically reduced. As tango venues could no longer afford to host live music, they reduced or stopped their activities or were closed down. In addition, influenced by the new trends from the United States, people were led to believe that their own musical

6

Introduction

heritage and expressions were old-fashioned. On the whole, there was a shift in public taste both causing and caused by the genre’s dispersal. Record labels stopped producing tango in order to sell rock and roll music, which was also continuously played on the radios, as the new, hip music, further marginalizing tango as a genre for old, backward people (Sierra 1985, p. 175). As Oscar Del Priore (2007, pp. 101–102) explains: In the sixties, a gradual lack of interest for tango started to show. The new generation turned to other rhythms, to other musical genres. Young people stopped listening to and dancing to tango. This resulted in the increasing disappearance of orquestas típicas, which were no longer in demand as before, and work for artists of the genre started to wind down. Besides the closingdown of cabarets and cafés, radio stations started to throw out the live sessions from their programming. Recording companies also began to produce more commercial and profitable artists and genres. Besides, out of the five most successful orchestras by the beginning of the 1940s only that of Pugliese would remain, and the other orchestra leaders were even disappearing one after the other: Di Sarli died in 1960, Troilo in 1975, D’Arienzo in 1976. . . . Rock and roll, which had erupted in Buenos Aires first through Bill Haley and then through the celebrated Elvis Presley, had supplanted tango in young people’s parties and dance venues. Tango was absent for this generation of youths, fans of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones that changed the direction of the recording industry in Argentina. Moreover, new idols of the so-called commercial music started to be created, arising mainly out of the TV program El Club del Clan, which eventually crushed the presence of orquestas típicas in Argentinian cultural life. According to Juan José Mosalini, ‘between the 1940s and the mid 1950s, there were nearly 700 active orquestas típicas; in the 1980s, only one or two were left’ (Keselman and García Falcó 2005, p. 202). Although the genre survived, thanks to smaller ensembles and a few orchestras, they were not able to mould as many young musicians as the traditional orchestras had done in the past. According to bandoneonist Daniel Binelli (Ibid., p. 176), In the 1980s, tango was secluded because throughout two generations there was virtually no teaching of bandoneon players, as in 1965 El Club del Clan had buried all possibilities of working in carnival celebrations, and the broadcasting of [North] American music was overwhelming. In this respect, pianist Atilio Stampone (Ibid., p. 214) adds: People think that as from the 1950s tango styles changed, but what actually changed was the orchestral line-up, which became smaller because of economic constraints. [Before the 1950s] [o]rchestras were made up of fourteen people. It was another country; people did attend and watch shows!

Introduction 7 Tango’s dispersal drastically reduced the transmission of knowledge between the old masters and the younger musicians, causing an information gap; due to tango being an oral tradition, written information was nowhere to be found. So, despite the key role certain artists had in the historical development of tango’s musical language, there is a noteworthy shortage of written information regarding their work and – excluding an educational book by Salgán (2001) – none of these artists explained their work or documented their production. In other words, none of them has made explicit the implicit knowledge revealed in their musical output. Even if this is not unusual in popular music practice, it indeed opens a field of inquiry for artists who seek to understand this musical language in depth and explore its constituent elements and techniques in a creative way, a field to which this volume contributes. Some remarkable musicians and ensembles following this period were the duo Salgán-De Lío, an original and virtuoso combination of piano and guitar; Quinteto Real, led by Salgán; bandoneonist Leopoldo Federico; and, later on, the FranciniPontier orchestra. In the meantime, and until his death, Astor Piazzolla offered his ‘tango nuevo’ to the world with different ensembles. Gradually, tango restored itself as a music that could be listened to without necessarily being linked to its dance form. Following the 1980s, tango slowly reclaimed its space in Argentina’s cultural scene, partially due to the great international success of the dance show Tango Argentino, which included live music. Locals reassessed the cultural value of tango music and dance, which resulted in more public consumption and production. The ensembles of Rodolfo Mederos, Néstor Marconi, Daniel Binelli and Juan José Mosalini, among others, were active in those and previous years. From the 1990s up to the present time, it has become increasingly normal for people (including youngsters) to dance to and perform tango. In Argentina and the rest of the world there are now many ensembles contributing to a varied and fresh tango scene. Some of them re-enact the tradition, while others build upon it to produce their own original creations. Pugliese, Salgán, Piazzolla and Beytelmann are historically and musically relevant for two main reasons: first, for their contribution to the definition of the stylistic norms that shape the tango model; second, for their ‘thickening’ or enlarging of that model through their numerous, lasting contributions to the genre. The term ‘thickening’ is used here since the development of this music shows a clear continuity, with its luminaries – always rooted in the tango tradition – both combining the already existing techniques and materials in new ways as well as providing additional ones from other practices through a process of borrowing and transforming. They were able to stretch the boundaries of the genre precisely because they knew the codes of the language so well. They developed some of its elements further while introducing new materials, techniques and concepts that were integrated into the general model, first considered exceptions or innovations and later becoming stylistic norms and models for new compositions, arrangements and styles. During the 1940s, among the ensembles and orchestras that contributed to the definitive expansion and consolidation of tango were the ones led by Osvaldo

8

Introduction

Pugliese (1905–1995) and Horacio Salgán (1916–2016). Each an admirer of the unique art of the other, they both developed new techniques for their instrument, the piano, and approached composition and arranging in a new way, while still relying on the tradition. The piano became the backbone of tango ensembles and the instrument from which arrangements could be conceived and conducted. As for Astor Piazzolla (1921–1992) and Gustavo Beytelmann (b. 1945), a similar process occurred: they developed tango’s language by pushing its boundaries and exploring its constituent elements further, mainly through their study and knowledge of Western art music composition and jazz. Piazzolla also began his professional activities by playing bandoneon in a traditional tango orchestra (Aníbal Troilo’s), displaying early on an immense creativity in his arrangements and compositions that he would later devote to his own ensembles. He deeply admired Salgán’s and Pugliese’s work, and Pugliese’s oeuvre exerted a great influence on Piazzolla, as a reference for his own compositions and arrangements. Piazzolla even recorded several compositions by Pugliese, with his own arrangements, as usual, and Pugliese also arranged and recorded some pieces composed by Piazzolla with his orchestra. Pianist Gustavo Beytelmann was one of the few musicians to continue and broaden the path initiated by his predecessors. An avowed admirer of Pugliese, Salgán and Piazzolla and great connoisseur of their work, he proposed and opened up new and original possibilities for tango music as the result of his diverse musical experiences. He moves confidently both in the popular and in the academic fields and, in turn, interweaves them. However, due to the bulk of his work being generated in Europe, Argentina has, until recently, been deprived of his innovations. Again, by introducing new materials, techniques and concepts, the composers and performers mentioned previously defined new models which, in Piazzolla’s case, are already standards in their own right – even though some traditionalists consider his music ‘not tango’. Regarding Beytelmann, his fresh, innovative techniques and ideas are currently inspiring a new generation of musicians, me included.

Note 1 Regarding tango phrasing or rubato, see Omar García Brunelli’s article (2015) ‘La cuestión del fraseo en el tango’.

2

Stylistic norms of tango music – its main materials and techniques Bárbara Varassi Pega

Tango is a living, dynamic music, and its function as a social code goes beyond the realm of popular music.1 Social, cultural, political and economic events of all kinds have historically influenced and defined what we know today as tango music, an open-ended language that continues to live and change in the hands of the artists involved in its practice. And, alongside the music, a whole universe of tango forms and tango-derived fields – ranging from dance, poetry, theatre and visual arts to design, fashion and cinema, among others – undergo similar processes and transformations through time. So while ‘tango’ is a social and cultural phenomenon that encompasses many different aspects, this book – The Art of Tango – focuses exclusively on the main features that shape and distinguish its musical language. All the definitions and explanations below are used in this volume to describe the many elements, processes and techniques found in the analyzed pieces and are therefore not meant to be exhaustive. While these are certainly primary features of tango music, they represent only some of the possibilities. Due to the intimate correlation and combination of the parameters, processes and materials presented in this book (register, instrumentation, harmony, articulations, texture, variation techniques, etc.),

10

Stylistic norms of tango music

they will be treated simultaneously in the analyses included in the following chapters; this study will deal with the interplay of all of these.

The model The ‘model’ encompasses the stylistic norms of tango music: the manifold contents that shape it and the codes tango musicians share in relation to those contents.2 These are the elements and tools being used in a certain framework to host a certain (in this case, tango) language, which serve to understand newly introduced parameters or modifications over time. Therefore, that which is part of the consolidated model belongs to the knowledge and expertise of all tango musicians. Influences from outside the model can enter the system and become part of it (as is the case of many features introduced by the musicians studied in this volume) or simply be used for a while and then left behind (as has happened with percussion, nowadays only occasionally used). To study and describe the model – the constituent elements and techniques of tango music – I refer to different parameters: formal, textural, harmonic and melodic features, rhythm and meter, techniques of composition, arrangement, variation, orchestration and segmentation, timbral and percussive effects, the use of register, performance techniques, the diverse accompanimental archetypes and their relationship with the main melodic lines. The most common elements of tango’s musical language (mainly described in this chapter) are oriented towards two main aspects: (1) deviating from or altering the perception of the steady beat and (2) generating contrasts. What has been introduced to the genre by the artists researched here and the ways in which they have used, combined and transformed those common elements will be further studied in the ensuing analyses (and occasionally mentioned here). My analytical method has therefore a twofold scope: to reveal what the tango model is made of by digging into its constituent elements and techniques and to decode and show its transformation through time in the hands of Osvaldo Pugliese, Horacio Salgán, Astor Piazzolla and Gustavo Beytelmann. A main case of systematization of new forms was enabled in the 1920s by the sextet led by violin player, arranger and composer Julio De Caro (1899–1980, see Chapter 3). Julio De Caro and his brother Francisco (pianist, arranger and composer), together with all the great musicians who joined that sextet in its diverse periods, provided new means of musical notation and instrumental skills that overhauled tango music at the time and served as a point of departure for the following generations, which include the four musicians studied here. These new means, at first considered ‘exceptions’, triggered a revolution in tango and were later incorporated into the genre. Another process of renovation occurred in the 1950s when Astor Piazzolla introduced elements from outside the musical codes of tango. His contributions to the model included – among many others described in the chapter devoted to his music – more and longer melodic phrases and sections, which he took from the music of his youth: jazz. Still, he kept the contrast between rhythmical and cantabile phrases and sections, each distinctive elements of tango music. Again, after initially being perceived as odd, Piazzolla’s stylistic contributions

Stylistic norms of tango music 11 became part of the musical language of many musicians from later generations, including the present one.

What is tango music and what is it made of? The general term tango music stands for a group of three different rhythms: milonga, vals criollo and tango proper. The milonga rhythm is derived from the habanera, from which the rhythmical pattern of the bass line in the milonga ciudadana (see the following) comes. The first tangos were actually based on the milonga rhythm, which was a legacy of gauchos and payadores (folksingers skilled in improvisation), who sang or recited verses accompanying themselves with the guitar. Two types of milonga can be distinguished: ciudadana [urban] (faster; Figure 2.1 on the companion website) and campera [rural] (slower; Figure 2.2 on the companion website). The milonga campera presents a rhythmical pattern known as bordoneo based on the 3–3–2 rhythm (explained later in this chapter). The vals criollo [waltz rhythm] comes from the European waltz and is in 3/4. Generally, the bass line presents a quarter note in the first beat of the bar, and the chords are articulated (usually changing register) in the second and third beats (Figure 2.3 on the companion website). The tango rhythm is typically established in a 4/4 bar – historically written in 2/4 – and clearly distinguishable from the milonga and the vals criollo rhythms described previously. The strong-weak (S-W) rhythmical organization within bars is preeminent in tango, with beats one and three usually being the strong beats and two and four the weak ones (this can also vary according to the accompanimental patterns used and the different orchestras’ styles). As this popular music traditionally has neither percussion nor a conductor outside the ensemble, an accompanying rhythmical base fulfils the task both of maintaining a steady beat and guiding the ensemble. Rhythmical base is the synchronization of the piano and double bass (left hand of the piano typically doubling the bass line one octave higher), performing the accompaniment, or the instruments performing the marcato (see the following) in a given section. Everything that happens within tango music evolves around this S-W structure, be it to emphasize, alter or counteract it. As tango music performance practice and the case studies in this book reveal, there are many musical elements and techniques used to counter the pulse: tango surrounds the pulse, plays around it. This and the persistent use of contrasts in all parameters are the two most salient features of tango music. The clearest evidence of development in tango music is the transitional process from musical materials aligning with the steady, accented beat (in this volume referred to as convergence) to contrapuntal features meant to animate the S-W structure (in this volume referred to as divergence). According to Gustavo Beytelmann,3 it is due to this steady beat that musicians needed to find alternatives – rhythmical and melodic shapes not in alignment with it – in order to avoid predictability, thereby developing devices and techniques that would

12

Stylistic norms of tango music

become definitive elements of tango. According to Novati (1980, p. 23), tango is made up of a series of little devices, always used with better precision and elegance, which constitute a discontinuous rhythm. Rests, syncopation, accent displacements and phrases starting with eighth rests on the downbeat are all outstanding traits of this unique rhythmical shape. However, on top of all these elements and the effects obtained, there is an essential aspect: these devices are utilized in such a way that they do not constitute something perceived as permanent in their audition. They constitute, in general, unexpected rhythmical events. Marcato, accompaniment or rhythmical/accompanying base are the names given to different rhythmical models used in tango to be played as the support for the orchestra or ensemble and to somehow express the beat and the harmony. The most representative patterns, as shown in Figures 2.4–2.9 on the companion website, are: •

• •

•

Marcato in 4 (Figures 2.4 and 2.5 on the companion website): the bass line is regular, presenting a quarter note in every beat of the bar (4/4). Depending on the prevailing styles and periods of the genre, the accent would fall on all the beats, beats one and three, or beats two and four; they can also be combined with each other. The chords that complete the harmony are structured according to the models illustrated in the figures, which usually alternate in order to create contrasts and variation as well as to alter or counteract the regularity of the bass line. Marcato in 2 (Figure 2.4 on the companion website): a variant of marcato in 4. Only beats one and three are actually played with quarter notes with rests in between, or in two half notes. Marcato in 3–3–2 (Figure 2.4 on the companion website): marcato that accentuates the first, fourth and seventh eighth notes within a 4/4 bar, resulting in a subdivision in groups of 3, 3 and 2 eighth notes. It is usually built on a bass line that shows two dotted quarter notes followed by a quarter note, whilst the chords above these quarter notes are played with the same rhythm or in eighth notes, with the previously mentioned accentuation. Marcato in yumba (Figure 2.4 on the companion website): a rhythmical variation on the marcato in 4, owing its name to the onomatopoeia of its rhythmical structure. It is a special type of marcato introduced by Osvaldo Pugliese’s orchestra, rendering the rhythmical base purely rhythmical in character and taking to an extreme the difference between beats one and three (heavily accented) in relation to beats two and four (light). Sometimes the arrastre (see what follows) is so marked that accentuation is inverted (on beats two and four instead of on beats one and three). Another important feature typical of Pugliese’s orchestra – designed to alter the stiffness of this marcato – is the subtle anticipation of beats one and three (by slightly reducing the length of beats two and four). In the example on the companion website the cluster is

Stylistic norms of tango music 13

•

•

• • •

written out. However, in many tango scores an ‘x’ in the bass would stand for a cluster of the lowest three to five white keys of the piano. Marcato ‘in the Arolas style’ (Figure 2.6 on the companion website): a variant of marcato in 4 that is characteristic of composer Eduardo Arolas in his tango La Cachila. The bass marks in 4, and harmony is presented with accents displaced by one eighth note. Marcato in umpa-umpa (Figure 2.7 on the companion website): a rhythmical variation on the marcato in 4 owing its name to the onomatopoeia of its syncopated rhythmical structure, systematized by Horacio Salgán. Again, these rhythmical models are oriented to make the marcato in 4 more dynamic. Syncopated marcato (Figure 2.8 on the companion website): the regular metric accent is preceded or succeeded in a syncopated way by counteraccents. It occurs in many variations.4 Marcato in double syncopation (or successive syncopation), (Figure 2.8 on the companion website): two syncopations per bar, with chords showing two different harmonies. Marcato with arrastre [dragging] (Figure 2.9 on the companion website): when any of the accompanimental patterns (a syncopated marcato or a marcato in 4 or in 2) begins anticipating its attack by a quarter or eighth note in relation to the downbeat. Usually the anticipation is played with a strong dynamic accent in order to contrast the meter.

Most features of the tango language developed from the need to alter the perception of the steady beat to avoid monotony and predictability. One primary example of this is syncopation, as it generates destabilization by shifting the accents from the beats. Salgán is particularly extreme in the use of syncopation. In his La llamo silbando, for example, both the melody and the accompaniment play mostly on the upbeat. There are plenty of examples where notes or figures come immediately before or after the S. In Pugliese’s yumba, for example, the S-W steady beat is strongly emphasized, but, as previously mentioned, his remarkable device is avoiding playing beats one and three precisely in tempo. In fact, they are slightly anticipated (mainly by the use of arrastres), provoking tension and generating motion. Sine qua non in tango music is the fraseo, which generates dialectic (or even tension-creating) relationships between beat and melody organization. In tango music we call fraseo/fraseado [phrasing/phrased] the use of techniques that alter the shape of the melody rhythmically, mainly by holding back or rushing, in order to avoid aligning with the beat. It can also involve ornaments and modification of timbres and pitch. In this way, performers – while playing a solo passage – transfer their subjective conception of the piece to the written structure. Fraseo might be historically related to language, as in Argentinian Spanish these fluctuations (holding back, rushing, and building up momentum towards end-accented sentences) are traceable in speech (Link and Wendland 2016, p. 103). Fraseo has a double function. First, it serves personal expression. Piazzolla has a way of phrasing which tends to rush; bandoneonist Aníbal Troilo, to drag; and

14

Stylistic norms of tango music

Salgán a mix of both, depending on the mood of the music. There are as many variants as there are artists; notation is only a means to an end, which is determined far more by individual artistic sensibility. Second, phrasing is the possibility of counteracting the steady beat: it dynamizes music by bringing it out from the mundane of a regular 1-2-3-4. Among the luminaries of tango, we can observe one fundamental: avoiding melodic convergence with the beat through their phrasing (mainly avoiding the downbeat), all of which creates great tension with the steady accompanying base. An additional strategy for playing around the steady beat is through syntactic organization by phrases. The phrase is the most highly valued element of tango interpretation. Musicians generally play phrases freely, ‘floating’ with a rubato, out-of-tempo melodic line over steady accompanimental patterns, which are mostly played a tempo. Contrary to fraseo, cuadrado [square] is the practice of playing without phrasing (therefore aligning with the beat), especially in rhythmical passages or sections. Be it phrased or cuadrado, melodies played over an accompanying base constitute the main texture of tango, the accompanying base also having the role of expressing the harmonic materials. To alter the perception of the steady beat, tango music also makes extensive use of rubato, which is when the whole orchestra or a large section is performing with accelerando or rallentando. It is generally expressed in two ways: • •

The marcato of one or more bars is accelerated towards the first beat of the following bar. This practice, also known as arrebatado, is often reinforced by an increase in dynamics. The marcato is laid-back to reinforce an end or to announce a new section.

The use of dynamic accents and articulations is yet another essential aspect of tango music. Typical articulations used include accents (>), staccatos and ‘legato in two’ (two notes linked with a slur, the first one accented and the second one staccato and lighter). The placement and interpretation of these three articulations constantly change across all notes in the so-called rhythmical tango passages, in contrast to the more sustained way of performing melodic tango passages (which are commonly legato). These two types of speech (rhythmical and melodic) usually alternate in order to create contrasts within a section or to distinguish section A from section B (apart from the conventional thematic characterization). Therefore, referring to an articulated segment usually implies the use of these articulations, again, in order to provide the steady pacing with contrasts or various counter-accents. The extreme dynamic differentiation between accented, percussive elements and unaccented, staccato and barely played elements is a device – representing one of the main elements of tango music – to both compensate for the lack of percussion as well as alter the perception of a steady beat. In addition, the use of both rubato (accelerandos and ritardandos) and sudden tempo changes serve the same purpose. Dragging, rushing, sudden stops, anticipating or delaying, and changing tempo in short time spans are each part of the standard vocabulary of tango playing. It is noteworthy that all these techniques are used in the course of a piece three minutes long, the average length of a traditional tango.

Stylistic norms of tango music 15 Dynamic accents are used as well to create convergence and divergence from the steady beat in 4/4. Convergence happens when elements align with the beat, for example a melody with dynamic accents on the notes of beats one and three or all four of them (1-2-3-4). Divergence would, conversely, refer to dynamic accents falling on the notes in between beats, such as a melody starting with a dynamic accent on the second eighth note of the bar, after the rhythmical base has played the downbeat as part of the rhythm in the accompaniment. The idea of convergence/divergence of the musical elements and parameters that constitute tango’s musical language is central to this work and is thoroughly described in the analyses included in this volume, offering the reader insight into a main feature of tango music and, therefore, its construction. As regards melody, convergence and divergence with the rhythmical base are also determined by the relationship of the notes that belong to the underlying harmony and their position in the bar. In the harmonic-melodic organization, the use of simple chords of three or four notes is enriched with the addition of grace notes that contrast both the harmony (when they do not belong to the chord) and the steady beat (usually counteracting the meter). Tango music is traditionally organized in a texture of melody with accompaniment, a result of the organic process of the vocal practice of tango being translated into an instrumental performance. In the analyses proposed in this work I describe tango’s textural organization as textural layers, which allows for a closer view. I follow the model for textural analysis proposed by musicologist Pablo Fessel (2000): Music texture is mainly characterized by a hierarchical structure of relatively autonomous fields of music organization, known as textural layers. These structures are represented based on three aspects: 1) The number of layers in every level of the textural hierarchy. Examples: a melody, a bass line, a harmonic ripieno as accompaniment. In turn, these elements might present a subsequent internal segmentation as well. 2) The characterization of such layers. Examples: ostinato line, pedal point, harmonic ripieno. 3) The identification of texturally relevant relations among the layers. For example: relations of homogeneity/heterogeneity, metrics, tonality, accent coincidence, attacks, etc. The marcatos and rhythmical patterns presented previously for milonga, vals criollo and tango are clearly part of the accompaniment. In what follows, I describe the main features of the melody and the ripieno. The melody is usually the main textural layer, although in the art of creating and re-creating tango music this might vary, as some of the case studies show. Normally, the melody is also referred to – or carries – what we call the (main) theme. A theme is musical material that constitutes a group possessing a certain completeness and has the following characteristics (Figure 2.10 on the companion website):

16

Stylistic norms of tango music

• •

Repetitive features in rhythms, intervals, notes, etc. At least one non-repetitive element that represents an anomaly, deviation or variation contrasting with the rest of the phrase. In Figure 2.10 on the companion website, for example, the anomaly is presented by exposing a new motive. Divisible into three segments: head, central body, coda. Typically, the tessitura is at least a minor sixth, and often exceeds it.

• •

In traditional tango the phrases are usually determined by the organization of the themes. Structural notes are the principal notes of the theme, generally belonging to the underlying harmony (in contrast to grace notes). Structural materials or features – rhythm, pitches, intervals, ways of playing and so on – are those that distinguish a given theme, segment or piece. These will be described in the next chapters as found in the analyzed pieces. Sometimes the musical material is organized by interval classes. Following the definition by music theorist and musicologist Allen Forte, a number expresses the distance between two pitches. Spelling, octave compounding or inversion are not considered: e.g. interval class 4 = major third or minor sixth (Klein n.d.). 1 2 3 4 5 6

= minor second/major seventh = major second/minor seventh = minor third/major sixth = major third/minor sixth = perfect fourth/perfect fifth = augmented fourth (tritone)

The theme (or main textural layer) can be played by one or more instruments or orchestral sections, which in tango we call solo, soli or tutti. • • •

Solo: the melody is played by a single instrument. Soli: several instruments play the same material homorhythmically (e.g. the strings and/or the bandoneons simultaneously play the same melody). Tutti (in this book, usually referred to as ‘full tutti’): the entire orchestra (including the rhythmical base) plays the same material homorhythmically. Cases in which all bandoneons and all strings play the same material with a marcato accompaniment are usually referred to as ‘tutti with accompaniment’ by tango musicians.

Ripieno is the term used in the ensuing analyses to refer to all the textural layers and materials that are not part of the melody or the accompanying rhythmical base. In tango music, most of the common ripieno elements include countermelodies, timbral effects (see the following), secondary accompanimental motives and several articulations of the harmonic elements of marcatos. Fills are also used, consisting of a short (less than a bar) figure generally played at points of melodic inactivity

Stylistic norms of tango music 17 by one or more instruments in the accompaniment. A ripieno can also often be a harmonic background (Figure 2.11 on the companion website): a group of chords, generally in half notes or whole notes (in a 4/4 bar), that functions as accompaniment to the main melody and can be combined with the rhythmical base. Figure 2.11 on the companion website is an example of the typical organization of textural layers in tango music. The chosen segment of Rubí by Juan Carlos Cobián and Enrique Cadícamo shows the usual melody with accompaniment exposed in three differentiated textural layers: main melody (upper staff), harmonic background as ripieno (middle staff) and rhythmical base (piano staff). Creating variations in textural density – the quantity of overlapping layers at a given time – is yet another technique widely used in tango music to obtain contrast. An example of the increase in textural density is the transition from one textural layer (melody) to: • • •

Two layers: melody plus rhythmical base. Three: melody plus rhythmical base plus countermelody. More: passage of free counterpoint.

The opposite process is referred to as reduction in textural density. In turn, instrumental density is used to describe the quantity of overlapping instruments at a given time, again a technique to create contrast. An example of the increase in instrumental density is the transition from two instruments to six. The opposite process is referred to as reduction in instrumental density. Instrumental density should not be confused with textural density: different instruments may be part of a single textural layer, as in the case of a tutti in parallel motion; conversely, a single instrument may perform multiple textural layers (e.g. in Bach’s partitas for cello). Another variation technique widely used is the manipulation of the attack or rhythmical density: the number of attacks at a given segment. In tango music the attack density does not necessarily entail a variation in speed. The most common case of an increase in attack or rhythmical density in tango music is the so called variación. The variación is a technique generally used to vary (hence the term ‘variación’) and emphasize the theme in its last recapitulation as well as to show virtuosity. It displays a rhythmical figurative subdivision of the pulse (typically in four), written in sixteenth notes within the 4/4 bar. The variación is also a convention to signal the end of a piece, both for the dancers and the public. As regards pitches, its structure is varied and based on a theme already played, and it mainly occurs in stepwise motion with chromatic features (Figure 2.12 on the companion website). Changing the tessitura or registral amplitude – the registral distance between the lowest and the highest pitch within a given passage or segment – is yet another technique used in tango music to create variation and contrast. The terms ‘expansion’ or ‘contraction’ will be used to denote, respectively, an increase or decrease in the range of the tessitura. Also frequent in tango music composition, arrangement and performance is the varied use of registral density: the way the space between the lowest and the highest pitch is filled through the instrumentation.

18

Stylistic norms of tango music

Yet another noteworthy technique used by refined tango musicians to re-create the structural materials of a piece is to generate ambiguity between background and foreground elements: this occurs when a secondary line takes the forefront and the main theme is concealed, hidden or positioned as a background layer. This is a variation technique of tango music normally applied after the first exposition of the theme. In some cases – as will be seen in subsequent chapters – the result is so interesting that it is perceived as new musical material. Form in tango music Form is the order, combination and way in which sections are built. Old tangos generally present three sections (tripartite form: A + B + C, with C commonly referred to as trio); however, from the 1920s–1930s on, musicians composed mainly in two parts following the typical song structure (bipartite form: A + B). Sections are mainly differentiated by type of speech and can be roughly divided into rhythmical, articulated and melodic, legato: when section A is rhythmical, section B is melodic, or vice-versa (applicable also at the phrase level). This constitutes a main feature of tango music related to creating contrasts and, as such, has been kept from generation to generation. Sections are further differentiated through thematic contrast and changes in tonality, with modulations commonly moving between parallel, relative or other closely related tonalities. Fragmentation is one of the most remarkable features of tango music. Carlos Di Sarli’s orchestra, among other traditional ensembles, presented a straightforward treatment of phrasing: what is at first legato is in a later phrase staccato; what has been earlier played by strings is afterwards played by bandoneons, and so on. Musicians use many techniques to fragment sections, phrases and semi-phrases into smaller segments: contrasts in rhythm, register, instrumentation, themes, dynamics, articulation, tempo or rubato, are among the most used. This contributes to thematic variation and helps to emphasize contrasts characteristic to the genre. Form is organized at different levels: for example, some unities may turn to shape a bigger structure that is perceived as a new unity, as illustrated by several motives which form phrases which in turn form periods and then entire sections. These units may relate to each other in three different ways: imitation, development and contrast, and they are also of great importance for orchestration and articulation. In tango music, motives can be short (one bar) or long (two bars or, exceptionally, three or four). Such motives present a combination of intervals and rhythms in a memorable shape or contour which usually implies an inherent harmony. A motive is used by repetition, as described previously in Don Agustín Bardi’s theme. The repetition may be exact, modified or developed. The union of several motives generates a more complete and accomplished structure that we call a phrase. Traditional tango music is generally structured in phrases that are regular and eight bars long, divided into two semi-phrases of four bars each. Each section usually consists of two eight-bar phrases; therefore, in traditional tango they are generally sixteen bars long. Apart from a few exceptions, the last phrase of each section is harmonically resolved with an authentic cadence and melodically resolved in the

Stylistic norms of tango music 19 first beat of the last bar. On the other hand, phrase endings that are not section endings often avoid creating cadential resolutions. The traditional tango I-V-I ending (also used for closing sections) is structured with a tonic chord in the first beat of the last bar, followed by a dominant chord (with f dynamics) in the second beat and then a final tonic chord (with p dynamics) in the third beat (Figure 2.13 on the companion website). Some tango musicians have found alternatives to this, sometimes even consistently applying one specific alteration, thus making it part of their signature. A noteworthy case is the open ending ‘in the Pugliese style’ (Figure 2.14 on the companion website), in which the last tonic chord (often with an added sixth) is shifted to the last beat of the bar by placing a quarter note rest on the third beat. Other cases will be discussed in the ensuing analyses. Timbral and percussive effects These are effects produced by the instruments in order to interfere with the rhythm – as they are usually used as percussive elements in relation to the rhythmical base – and the harmony: as they often have no defined pitch, harmony is temporarily suspended. It should also be noted that, because percussive instruments are not standard in tango, these effects work in a powerful way and can emphasize or work against the steady pacing. Again, the effects mentioned here only account for the pieces analyzed in this volume and are not meant to be exhaustive. On the violin Chicharra [cicada]: a very special percussive effect obtained by applying the bow exactly behind the bridge and towards the tailpiece of the instrument. There should be a firm grasp by the bow hand, which exerts an excess of pressure downward. The sound produced is of indefinite pitch (Cabrera 2018). Látigo [whip]: a brief, violent ascending glissando on the first string through a rapid sweep of the bow (Peralta 2008, p. 189). Tambor [drum]: produced by placing one fingertip of the left hand on the fingerboard, between the third and fourth string, in order to slightly dampen the vibrations of the fourth string, which is plucked with the right hand. The sound produced is of indefinite pitch and resembles that of a drum, hence the name. On the bandoneon Golpes de caja [box slaps]: the wooden box of the instrument is slapped on the elevated portion beneath the keys for the left hand. Additionally, brushing over the keys with the fingernails is an effect for the bandoneon. On the double bass Strappata: made by striking the strings with the bow, so that both the wood and hair of the bow strike the string, while tapping the fingerboard with the left hand.

20

Stylistic norms of tango music On the piano (pitched) Two-hands piano solo: typical manner of performing a solo melody in parallel motion with both hands at a distance of one or two octaves or a sixth or a third (generally in a medium-high register). Campanitas [little bells]: produced by playing notes (such as arpeggios, octaves and minor seconds, among others) in the highest registers of the piano.

Creating and re-creating tango music In traditional tango the idea of composition is substantially different from its counterpart in some forms of Western art music. The practice of tango involves looking at various artists’ outputs (signed compositions) as ‘open’ objects; in other words, tangos have always been freely manipulated by both performers and arrangers, according to tastes, fashions, times and styles. As a popular music genre – and through a process not unique to tango – this represents one of its main features as well as an important act of translation: arrangements of the same piece by different musicians over time result in a diversity of works that enrich both the genre and the original pieces. The roles of ‘author’ (the composer) and ‘manipulator’ (the arranger or performer) often overlap. This is the reason why the term ‘re-creation’ is preferred in this volume to the more common ‘arrangement’: different versions of the same tango become so elaborated and distinct that they stand for themselves as ostensibly new compositions, crafted from other creations. In fact, musicians will consider a full revision of the materials and techniques they find in the pieces they arrange and even the addition of new ones, be it from other traditions or of their own invention. Creative arrangers and performers seek to come up with a personal version of a piece, the realization of which is not limited to a stamp of individuality – such as might be desired in any other genre of music – but goes even further, allowing the artists to vary, fundamentally, the structural materials of the music. This was particularly evident in the Época de oro of tango, when the public would prefer one orchestra over another based on the specificities of their style: even when orchestras had the same particularly popular tunes in their repertoire, their versions were so distinct that followers and fans championed their favourites based on these artistic differences. The specificity of the musical language of tango makes it possible to expand borders on the one hand while maintaining the music’s character on the other; this will become clear in the pieces studied in this book. A strain of familiarity is expressed in every instance of the compositions, yet each one is unique. In light of this, and in order to trace and map such revisions in the arrangements presented in this work, it was often necessary to include, as reference, the original published scores for solo piano (see the following) that the revisions are normally based on. In this way it is easier to understand how the musicians used and transformed the original elements of the pieces they arranged, which further contributes to the idea of re-creation. As will be seen in the case studies that follow, similar processes, techniques and materials are to be found in both compositions as well

Stylistic norms of tango music 21 as arrangements, yet another reason to use the terms creation and re-creation, respectively.

The available scores Traditionally, published tango scores consist of simplified versions for solo piano. Tango sheet music was produced by music publishers beginning in the early 1900s for sale to a broad public and amateur musicians for playing at home. The melody in the upper staff is generally written cuadrado with an approximate rhythm, and in the lower staff some rudimentary accompanimental patterns establish the harmony, based on progressions of I-(IV)-V-I. Thus, if one is unfamiliar with the vocabulary of tango that would enable a ‘creative’ reading of these scores, it is impossible to achieve a stylistically correct interpretation. Additionally, the arrangements made from these scores were rarely published, making the work of the arranger indispensable for all ensembles playing tango music. For this book, it was necessary either to transcribe or to obtain the transcriptions of certain versions in order to be able to analyze them. The figures that exemplify many of these analyses thus reveal a method of writing that is more faithful to the recording than to the scores musicians used to read, which indeed were altered for performance and recording situations.5

Notes 1 In this book the term ‘popular music’ is used to refer to tango and folklore [Argentinian folk music] and sometimes also to jazz music. 2 The term ‘model’ as well as many of the stylistic traits discussed in this chapter arise from my own knowledge of the subject, the sources and experts consulted, and my muchappreciated talks with Gustavo Beytelmann. 3 Beytelmann repeatedly refers to this concept, which is for me an illuminating way to understand tango’s stylistic devices. 4 For a detailed description of the different variations of syncopated marcato in tango, see Peralta’s La Orquesta Típica (2008, pp. 69–78). 5 This study will not analyze the possibilities for interpretation of individual rhythmical or melodic figures, articulations and other features, which in themselves provide enough material for additional research.

3

Boedo and the De Caro school Bárbara Varassi Pega

Boedo and the De Caro school 23

Boedo Composed by Julio De Caro in 1928, lyrics by Francisco Rimoli Copyright © Universal Music Publishing S.A. Reproduced by kind permission of Universal Music Publishing S.A. Recorded by Julio De Caro’s sextet for the first time in 1928 for the label RCA Victor. Julio De Caro and Emilio De Caro, violins; Francisco De Caro, piano; Pedro Laurenz and Armando Blasco, bandoneons; Enrique Kraus, double bass. Duration: 2′56″ Besides being one of Julio De Caro’s iconic tangos, Boedo constitutes a representative example of the combination of traditional tango composition and form with avant-garde arrangement, orchestration and performance practices. It was so highly praised that many tango musicians arranged and recorded it, including the orchestras of Francini-Pontier, Osvaldo Pugliese and Horacio Salgán; the duo Salgán-De Lío; and Astor Piazzolla’s Octeto Buenos Aires. Boedo is therefore perfectly suited for investigating De Caro’s style, the innovations crafted with his sextet and his groundbreaking contribution to tango music. The following analysis will serve to highlight the salient features of the De Caro school which would shape future tango music and musicians, including Pugliese, Salgán, Piazzolla and Beytelmann. Boedo is traditionally built on regular two-bar motives structured in a call-andresponse arrangement, which in turn form neat eight-bar phrases. Sections contain two phrases – therefore sixteen bars long – and typically end with a perfect cadence. Melody and accompaniment contrasts always align with formal segmentation. In contrast to the tangos with three sections played during the Guardia vieja, Boedo already displays an A-B-A binary form with a quite extended B section and rhythmical, articulated fragments in alternation with melodic, legato ones. Along with cadences and speech (rhythmical/legato), phrases and sections are further characterized through contrasts in the themes, orchestration, register, texture and the accompanying rhythmical patterns. Segmentation is organized in discrete blocks, and hence motives, phrases and sections never interweave (as can be seen in other pieces analyzed in this volume). Rather, phrases and sections connect to each other through upbeat figures and passages that smooth out the formal segmentation. The tonality – D major – is maintained during the whole piece, constituting a big contrast to established practice and dispensing with tonal segmentation. De Caro’s contribution to the practice of instrumental tango music is a refined use of counterpoint as well as innovative composition and orchestration techniques. These, together with a high level of instrumental performance, result in a complexity that, on the one hand, more or less defines the tango model standardized since then and, on the other, greatly contrasts with earlier periods. Variation techniques also present noteworthy innovations and are used – together with orchestration – to transform and diversify the constituent materials of the piece and support segmentation. Without such treatment it would be impossible to reach the three minutes

24

Boedo and the De Caro school

average duration of traditional tangos – which are indeed crafted from rather short themes (sixteen seconds in the case of Boedo) – and shape entire pieces in a musically interesting way. The analysis presented here is based on the previously mentioned recording by De Caro’s sextet and its transcription (reproduced here by kind permission) by pianist and composer Lucas Guinot, who shared it with me for this work together with his own analysis of the piece. Figure 3.1 on the companion website shows the formal structure of Boedo, including sections, sub-sections (phrases), their number of bars, the main instrumentation used and the kind of marcato that prevails. Introduction (from bar 1 to bar 5, Figure 3.2 on the companion website), [00:00–00:08] The introduction of Boedo comprises 5 bars in which the violins perform, in pizzicato, ascending broken chords that, in their progression, outline a descending scale of D major, the tonality of the whole piece. Both the distance between the first and second violins, as well as that between the upper note in the piano right hand and the bass in the left hand, form the interval of a sixth. This already reveals an elegant treatment of counterpoint and voice-leading, a result of the musician’s academic musical training. In bar 5, both bandoneons perform an upbeat figure towards section A, again a sixth apart and based on the typical tango ornaments with neighbouring tones, turns and passing notes. This upbeat figure will precede all phrases in section A. The introduction (and its repetition as a bridge towards the end of the piece) are the only sections with a steady, unchanging marcato (here in 2), which serves as a great contrast to the diverse rhythmical patterns used in sections A and B. Section A (from bar 6 with upbeat figure to bar 21), [00:08–00:40] Section A is divided into two phrases, a1 and a2. Both phrases are identical in their first semi-phrase (four bars) and conclude with a different semi-phrase in order to optimize flow towards the next phrase and section, respectively (a1 ends with a connecting passage to a2 that avoids the typical I-V-I; a2 ends with a perfect cadence to conclude section A, Figure 3.3 on the companion website). The theme in section A is clearly built over motives structured in a call-and-response arrangement (indicated in Figure 3.3). The melodic profile of the theme is crafted from a highly ornamented sequence of chord tones that highlight the underlying harmonic sequence of I-II-V-I over the first four bars. The voicing is now arranged over intervals of a third. In his (unpublished) analysis of Boedo (2010), Lucas Guinot discovers an interesting similarity between the ornamentation of the double neighbour used to shape the upbeat figure in bars 5 and 13 and the ornamentation used to shape the main melodic motive in section A. These common elements are indicated in Figure 3.3 on the companion website with ovals. Interesting to note is the anticipation of the motive in bar 8, which is also different in its melodic profile compared to that in bar 6. In their thorough analysis of the same piece, Link and Wendland (2016) go

Boedo and the De Caro school 25 a step further and find a double neighbour tone (turn) throughout the first semiphrase of a1 (Figure 3.4 on the companion website). This compositional technique will be again found in Astor Piazzolla’s Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi, also analyzed in this volume (Chapter 6). Regarding the rhythmical aspect of the main textural layer, Lucas Guinot also finds a gradual displacement of the accent and rhythmical point of arrival (Figure 3.5 on the companion website). Although the three rhythmical patterns in bars 1, 5 and 6 start on the offbeat, they are placed in different positions of the bar. In bar 1 the accent falls on the third beat, and its rhythmical point of arrival falls on the first beat of the next bar. In bar 5 the accent falls on the second beat, and its rhythmical point of arrival on the last beat of the same bar. Lastly, bar 6 has the accent on the second eighth note (preceded by a rest) and its rhythmical point of arrival on the third beat of the same bar. Further features of section A worth mentioning are: •

•

•

The theme (a1) enters with an accent in the second eighth note of bar 6 while the rhythmical base clearly plays on the downbeat. The resulting rhythmicalaccentual contrast animates the piece and helps to differentiate the textural layers. The arrangement of elements out of alignment with the beat is a device that will be further exploited and expanded as part of the development of tango music, as the ensuing analyses will show. The rhythmical base alternates between a marcato in 4 and syncopation with no repeating patterns (in contrast with earlier tangos that present a steady, repeating marcato). All textural layers converge in the arrastres in the first semi-phrase, which are absent in the second semi-phrase (both in a1 and a2), further distinguishing their formal segmentation. The bass line already features a more melodic profile compared to the alternating tonic-dominant arrangement typical of more rudimentary tangos. This novel treatment of the bass line serves to enrich the main textural layer and general texture of the pieces. This would soon become standard practice.

Also interesting to listen to (normally not notated in the score, as this is part of the performer’s personal interpretation) are the ornamentation, portamentos, legatos and glissandos between notes (sliding towards a higher-pitched arrival) in the violin. Glissandos are also performed by the double bass, although this is quite difficult to hear in these old recordings. The legato is also used by the first violin in bar 8 (Figure 3.3 on the companion website) to provide contrast and distinguish the second motive of the phrase. This contrast is further defined by a change in instrumentation: the first violin in this bar is phrasing completely alone, while the second violin features a brief counterpoint line. The concluding semi-phrases of a1 and a2 present the following differences (Figure 3.3 on the companion website): •

A piano solo of chromatic, ascending octaves concludes a1 and generates contrast in instrumentation (as it is the first time the piano is heard alone) and

26

•

Boedo and the De Caro school register (during the whole piece the piano is arranged in the higher registers for connecting passages and thematic material and in a lower register with very restricted tessitura for accompanying marcatos). Bars 18–21 present a new orchestration to conclude the phrase a2: only the first violin and the right hand of the first bandoneon constitute the main textural layer, while all other instruments (including the left hand of the first bandoneon) perform a marcato in 2 that restrains the orchestral force, leading to a marcato in 4 that ends in a perfect cadence, thus concluding section A. Section B (from bar 22 with upbeat figure to bar 37, Figure 3.6 on the companion website), [00:40–01:12]

This section presents a typical thematic contrast. The melodic profile still features an upbeat figure (now with every motive) and the motives are characterized by mainly descending chromatic motion, which contrasts the ascending chromatic motion in the piano passage in bars 11–12. The same materials are repeated and sequenced in the subsequent motive with one anomaly in bar 26, when an arpeggio similar to those in the introduction appears, signalling the beginning of the second semi-phrase. Apart from the thematic differentiation, other clear contrasts are introduced in relation to: • •

•

• •

Instrumentation: a radical change occurs, as the entire section B is performed by the bandoneons only. Register: in section B the bandoneons play one octave higher than in section A. Furthermore, as the bass line disappears, the tessitura is restricted. In bars 27–28 (and their repetition in 35–36) the bandoneons play in their high register. Texture: this section presents a more contrapuntal treatment of the layers. The first bandoneon clearly carries the theme, while the second bandoneon accompanies with a rhythmical countermelody rather than with a marcato. The contrary motion displayed in some bars clearly shows a careful treatment of counterpoint. Rhythm: this section features a 3–3–2 rhythmical structure, both in the accentuation used in the melody as well as in the accompaniment. Relationship between the melody and the accompaniment: contrary to section A, here both the main textural layer and the accompaniment converge on the downbeat at the beginning of each bar. This creates yet another noteworthy contrast between sections A and B and helps differentiate their constituent materials.

Section B is also divided into two phrases, b1 and b2, which diverge only at the very end: an upbeat feature in the last bar of b1 leading to b2, a perfect cadence in the last bar of b2 to highlight segmentation and conclude section B.

Boedo and the De Caro school 27 Section B′ (from bar 38 with upbeat figure to bar 53, Figure 3.7 on the companion website), [01:12–01:43] This section reveals an extraordinary display of talent and skills. In just one eight-bar phrase numerous combinations of orchestration, texture, themes, performance techniques and accompanimental materials are delineated in great detail. To begin with, a feature found in the work of the four musicians studied in this volume is presented conspicuously here: the ambiguity between background and foreground layers. A lyrical, legato and phrased violin solo performed by Julio De Caro fully takes the forefront, while the main theme of section B (in a simplified version consisting of only sixteenth notes) is offered as a contrasting, rhythmical countermelody by the first bandoneon. Other pieces by De Caro, such as El monito (recorded with his sextet), also use this technique of exchanging foreground and background layers: a simple, intelligent and creative way to thwart the listener’s perception, giving the impression of a brand new section by merely adding a melodic line to already existing material. Additionally, the violin solo takes centre stage through a display of performative virtuosity, shifting octaves and directions to allow for dazzling portamentos and glissandos between notes. This section presents a more contrapuntal treatment of the materials, organized in three and four layers (in contrast to the two layers of section A) and highlighted through performance skills that include nuanced dynamics. The marcato is interspersed with rhythmical countermelodies, and the contrary motion displayed in some bars clearly shows a careful treatment of counterpoint. The remaining instruments present persistent changes on a bar-to-bar basis that never repeat, including imitative passages and interlocking instrumentation. The rhythmical base in 4 serves as a foundation upon which all these contrasts rest, while the piano often interrupts the marcato with imitative passages or to join the countermelody played by the second bandoneon. Noteworthy here is that the bass line in 4 accentuates beats two and four (instead of beats one and three) by means of a legato in two. Again, some empty bars in the double bass and other instruments (such as bars 43 and partially 45) provide space for the other layers to emerge, especially the two-hand passages in the higher registers of the piano. Section B′ is also divided into two phrases, b1′ and b2′, which again only differ in their second halves in order to better lead into the phrase immediately following. In the last bar of section B′ the upbeat figure of section B leads to its last occurrence, which is almost identical to the first. In this way, section B completes its third and final repetition (B, B′, B), with a total of six phrases presenting the same thematic materials (with different instrumentation) and featuring as main contrast the added violin solo over B′. Finally, the same bars as presented in the introduction function as a bridge to return to section A, in which a1 and a2 are literally repeated.

28

Boedo and the De Caro school

Interesting to note: during the repetition of phrases and sections, the structural materials are restated literally, while contrasts are ensured through orchestration and arrangement techniques. In later pieces, such as the ones presented in the ensuing analyses, the melodic profiles of motives and themes as well as the structural materials of the themes themselves often undergo transformations.

The De Caro school The materials and techniques analyzed in Boedo were innovative for their time and would, following their reception and assimilation, endure as main traits of tango music: so much so that tango is described as ‘before De Caro’ or ‘after De Caro’, as historians confirm (Sierra 1977). According to Julio Nudler (in the ‘Julio De Caro’ blog on Todo Tango, n.d.), the De Caro school, on the instrumental level, and the Gardel school, on the vocal level, were each to become the guide and model to follow in their corresponding areas. Nudler synthesizes De Caro’s style as the perfect blending of the essence of the spirited and playful tango, originating in the slums, with a sentimental and melancholic expressivity, thus reconciling the criollo folk roots with the European influence. More complex and sophisticated arrangements and compositions as well as increasing technical and musical skills within performance provoked many changes. As can be seen in Boedo and in many other pieces by De Caro’s sextet, all instruments are moving towards more refined and challenging performative possibilities, which in turn served to attract more highly trained musicians who were increasingly interested in tango precisely due to its artistic and expressive possibilities. This growing interest of professionals – including musicians devoted to Western art music and sometimes even holding positions in symphony orchestras – would play a huge role in the development of tango music. Besides their musical advancements, this represents the biggest impact of De Caro’s sextet, one that shapes the history of tango music up to the present day. In the diverse line-ups of the sextet, De Caro always recruited the best musicians in the field, thus contributing to the social acceptance of tango music even in circles where it was not yet held in high esteem. Some of De Caro’s musicians would change the history of tango through the specific use of their instruments within this musical language, defining models of interpretation to be followed from then on. Just to name a few: Pedro Maffia and Pedro Laurenz defined to a great extent the bandoneon school and inspired all later generations (including Piazzolla, who dedicated his tango Pedro y Pedro to them); Luis Petrucelli, bandoneonist as well; Emilio De Caro (yet another brother) and Manlio Francia on the violins; and Leopoldo Thompson on the double bass also contributed new instrumental approaches to tango music. All of them bestowed their personal traits as performers to the sextet, while in turn the sextet shaped their musical output. The impact of their music was such that it attracted young musicians, who eagerly took seats in the front rows of their performances. Some of these musicians would later become great names within the history of this musical language, such as Orlando Goñi, Alfredo Gobbi and Aníbal Troilo (who later also played with De Caro). On

Boedo and the De Caro school 29 occasion, especially for the encores, the audience would stop dancing in order to just listen. Julio De Caro’s violin style also changed the way tango might be performed, permanently expanding the possibilities of the instrument through the inclusion of expressive portamentos, arrastres, glissandos, phrasings, a particular vibrato and use of pizzicato as well as the emphatic use of the frog of the bow. De Caro’s violin-cornet also marked an era and influenced many contemporary musicians and ensembles, although it did not remain in the practice of tango for long. Following the path already embarked on by Juan Carlos Cobián, the piano started to gain its leading role within tango ensembles, and further devices developed through the hands of Francisco De Caro, including frequent connecting passages and fills. New ways of structuring the melodic profile of the bass line as well as an array of possibilities to introduce variation within the marcatos and rhythmical patterns of the accompaniment were explored. Additionally, the second violin and the bandoneons developed new roles, becoming involved in complex constructions of melodies, countermelodies, accompanimental features, performative effects and rhythms. The double bass also became prominent and – together with the piano left hand whose musical line it always shared – expanded its expressive and melodic tools together with a more varied array of rhythmical combinations, including pizzicato and bow techniques, in addition to the performative effects already described. Pugliese, Salgán, Piazzolla and Beytelmann all inherited these new forms.

4

Osvaldo Pugliese – his life, musical style and orchestra and his contribution to instrumental tango music Bárbara Varassi Pega

Introduction Pianist, composer, arranger and orchestra leader (1905–1995) Osvaldo Pugliese received his first musical education from his father, an amateur flautist who played in several tango quartets. He first learned to play the violin, like his brothers, and then studied piano at local music conservatories. As a teenager he accompanied silent movies, and his professional career began in a bar called Café de la chancha [Pig’s café], a neighbourhood bar (owing its name to its owner’s poor personal hygiene) where tango performances took place regularly. He later worked as a substitute pianist in a number of dance orchestras and then joined the ensemble led by the legendary female bandoneonist Paquita Bernardo, where he met violinist Elvino Vardaro, with whom he would later, in 1929, form the Vardaro-Pugliese sextet. The ensemble was disbanded due to lack of commercial success but was re-formed with a new line-up in 1930, including such

Osvaldo Pugliese 31 luminaries as Alfredo Gobbi on second violin and Aníbal Troilo and Ciriaco Ortiz on bandoneon. By the time Pugliese assembled his own orchestra in 1939 he was already a professional pianist of renown who had collaborated with the most outstanding musicians and ensembles of his time: bandoneonist Enrique Pollet’s sextet and the orchestras led by bandoneonists Pedro Laurenz, Miguel Caló and Pedro Maffia. Pugliese produced his most refined works with his own orquesta típica, to which he was devoted exclusively until his death in 1995. Pugliese’s unique style was strictly related to his orchestra, distinguishable by a strong and energetic drive and persistent changes in the orchestration (Link and Wendland 2016, p. 183). Changes are systematically crafted in other parameters as well (rhythm, register, themes, dynamics and articulation, among others), which creates a kind of fragmentation so typical of Pugliese’s style. Contrasts are also to be found in melodic and accompanimental patterns, tempo changes and his trademark extreme rubatos with the whole orchestra; tango’s typical alternation between melodic and rhythmical types of speech take centre stage in all his pieces. These, together with his frequent recourse to dissonances and his innovative composition techniques, such as the superimposition of thematic materials from different formal sections and the interplay of foreground and background layers, all combine to establish Pugliese’s unmistakable signature. The case studies presented in this chapter unravel these aspects in detail. Pugliese’s aesthetic stance within the context of the historical development of tango can be appreciated through some of his statements: Tango has two well-defined traits: the melodic and the rhythmical or milonguero trait. The expression of melodic tango culminated with pianists Franciso De Caro, Carlos Flores and, to a certain extent, Juan Carlos Cobián. They were all the products of an era, back in 1926. The other trend is the more popular one, since it was embraced by the people who went to dance balls and cafés as tango that could be listened to and danced to as well. It is the line of tango milonga characteristic of [violinist and pianist] Agustín Bardi, [bandoneonist] Eduardo Arolas, [bandoneonist] Pedro Maffia, [violinist] Julio De Caro and [bandoneonist] Pedro Laurenz. When I had the chance to assemble my own orchestra, I thought about which direction to choose. I chose the milonguero one, and I have always remained faithful to this trend, in terms of feelings and awareness. . . . We always followed an evolutionist line, yet always within the popular tradition of tango. (Keselman and García Falcó 2005, p. 35) I come from the school of Julio and Francisco De Caro, Pedro Maffia and Pedro Laurenz. Through their legacy I adopted a style based on the revision and inclusion of musical forms characteristic of tango. My style is a cultural heritage from those masters. My way of playing greatly resembles Francisco De Caro’s, a superb musician of unequalled musical richness. It’s very clear that these were the initial roots of our repertoire. We relied on that very repertoire when we started to play together in 1939. There is no getting round the

32

Osvaldo Pugliese tango movement created by Julio De Caro, who introduced the orchestral arrangement and contributed a clearly defined musicality to the genre. (Del Priore 2007, p. 60)

In the 1970s, Julio De Caro considered himself to be Pugliese’s spiritual and artistic father. He deemed Pugliese to be his ‘best son’ (Keselman and García Falcó 2005, p. 22). In line with this sentiment, he stated: Troilo and Federico are also my sons. [Violinist] Gobbi and [bandoneonist] Piazzolla himself were, too. But Pugliese was my first son. Also, if Cobián was a man ahead of his time, if Pedro Maffia and Francisco De Caro were pioneers on their instruments, then Pugliese was a precursor of modernism in tango. (Ibid.) In fact, Julio De Caro’s pieces recorded by Pugliese’s orchestra in the 1940s were played in nearly the same arrangements as De Caro’s original ones. The renewal of tradition, initiated by Pugliese, begins with La rayuela (1953), whose arrangement he first asked from Emilio Balcarce,1 requesting it be different from Julio De Caro’s. From then on, with the re-creation of many tango pieces, the orchestra gradually developed a style that reached its zenith in the late 1950s. The orchestra developed an original, vigorous marcato – the self-named yumba – which would become their trademark, as Pugliese stated: Tango has a characteristic trait originating from the folklore of the Pampa: the arrastre or dragging, especially practiced by the school of Julio De Caro, [pianist] Di Sarli and also our ensemble. On the other hand, you have the marcato, which Julio De Caro accented on the first and third beats, sometimes with an arrastre. We have combined both things: the marcato of the first and third beats, and the percussive, shaking dragging. (Del Priore 2007, p. 72) The essence of the folklore of the Pampa carries deep meaning in Pugliese’s concept of tango. For him, criollo (denoting the mix of European – mostly Spanish – and native American elements, both racially and culturally) is the ‘brother’ of porteño (the inhabitants – and their cultural characteristics – of Buenos Aires) (Keselman and García Falcó 2005, p. 12). In the words of violinist Mauricio Marcelli: The orchestra was more melodic in its initial period; it had more strings. Then it gradually added a rhythmical feel that is unique, absolutely personal, that came from experiences from before the orchestra’s time, created by Julio De Caro. Osvaldo’s orchestra was a version of Julio De Caro’s, only much more modern, which also resembled Alfredo Gobbi in some aspects. As Pugliese shaped his style, the orchestra gradually improved. (Ibid., p. 62)

Osvaldo Pugliese 33 Regarding the development of his style, Pugliese stated: I did not create the Pugliese style, the public did. As I learnt new things, new ideas came to my mind. I rehearsed them and presented them to the public. If they approved of them, it meant I had understood their sensitivity, their aspirations. And the idea was kept. And that is how the so-called Pugliese style took shape. (Ibid., p. 35) On the other hand, the continuity of the orchestra allowed Pugliese to reinforce his style and his ideas, based on valuable contributions from his musicians. Among them, Aniceto Rossi provided a distinct rhythmical sensibility with his bass playing, while Osvaldo Ruggiero contributed his sense of phrasing on bandoneon. Violinist Enrique Camerano, a representative of the De Caro style, offered contrasts in poignant marcato alongside long, lyrical solos, of vast expressive power, and ‘a certain gypsy air’, as pointed out by Szymsia Bajour (Del Priore 2007, p. 62). Astor Piazzolla claimed: If Gobbi’s merit lies in having introduced harmony in tango, Pugliese’s is having given it its rhythmical essence. For me, they are both admirable. He is Pugliese today, and he will be tomorrow, as he plays in the manner typical of his times and he is, first and foremost, a true scholar. I wish there were many Puglieses. Young people who love tango and people who create tango need them. (Ibid., p. 67) ‘The composers’ orchestra’ The origins of what we know today as Osvaldo Pugliese’s orchestra was the ensemble that made its debut on 11 August 1939 in café El Nacional, Buenos Aires, Argentina. It was formed by Enrique Alessio, Osvaldo Ruggiero, Luis Bonnat (bandoneons); Enrique Camerano, Julio Carrasco, Jaime Tursky (violins); Aniceto Rossi (double bass) and Amadeo Mandarino (voice), with Pugliese at the piano. All of Pugliese’s musicians were outstanding performers and arrangers, facility in both roles being essential for joining the group. Pugliese would encourage his musicians to write arrangements, motivating them with the phrase ‘get music paper dirty’. During rehearsals, each musician made suggestions and pieces were revised until a final version was agreed upon. Because of the way they worked, Pugliese’s orchestra became known as ‘the composers’ orchestra’. According to bandoneonist Daniel Binelli, Pugliese rejected certain arrangements as proposing ‘too many ideas together’. Pugliese sought to remove superfluous notes, keeping only the essential ones in order to present a structure with the fewest elements possible. Once the arrangement was deemed acceptable, it would be premiered. If it proved to be a success, it would be added to the repertoire; if not, it would at least be recorded.

34

Osvaldo Pugliese

Another singular feature of Pugliese’s orchestra was its adoption of a cooperative system of self-regulation. There was a grading system that allowed for penalties, imposed for certain forms of misbehaviour, such as absence without leave or a fine consisting of a pay cut, for example. Each musician received a grade depending on his seniority and his degree of popularity. Thus, on occasions, Osvaldo Ruggiero, greatly successful as a composer, earned more money from the orchestra than Pugliese himself. The entire group made the decisions concerning the orchestra, its activities (whether to embark on a tour or not, whether they accepted a show or not, etc.) and their artistic fee. In some cases they even decided to play for free because, upon debate, it was considered to be fair. This element of the ensemble originated from Pugliese’s political activism, which he demonstrated in both his personal and professional life. He was a member of the Communist Party, his affiliation with it leading to bans on his orchestra’s broadcasting. As Pugliese recalls: ‘in 1948 I was virtually wiped off the map. Nobody offered me a job, I suffered humiliations; yet the orchestra kept playing, without the piano, while I was in jail, with a red carnation on the piano’ (Keselman and García Falcó 2005, p. 32). His politics also led him to establish the foundation La Casa del Tango in Buenos Aires, a project he had long struggled to realize. La Casa del Tango was a life concept for Pugliese, the embodiment of a musician’s solidarity with his art and other musicians: providing a place to learn, practice, and experiment. In 1985, Pugliese stated that, among other dreams, they wanted to build a small university where – besides tutoring on specific subjects such as performance and singing techniques – lectures could be given and research carried out and which would also include a first-class library. It is worth mentioning that, up to the present, in Buenos Aires, the Centro Cultural Osvaldo Pugliese is active and open to the public for anyone interested in their available material or activities, totally free of charge. The year 1968 marked a turning point for the ensemble, as six of its best musicians decided to form a sextet in the Julio De Caro style for night shows. Bandoneon players Osvaldo Ruggiero and Víctor Lavallén, violinists Oscar Herrero and Emilio Balcarce, pianist Julián Plaza (formerly a bandoneon player in Pugliese’s orchestra), double bass player Aniceto Rossi and singer Jorge Maciel left the orchestra due to shortage of work and Pugliese’s decision to keep the ensemble focussed mainly on performing on TV and live shows. Calling themselves Sexteto Tango, the members of the new ensemble initially performed while still remaining in Pugliese’s orchestra. However, as their popularity grew, they eventually decided to leave, and Pugliese was thus forced to form a new ensemble. In this new line-up, which remained more or less stable until his death, Pugliese kept Arturo Penón on bandoneon, Raúl Domínguez on violin, and Abel Córdoba as singer. New musicians included Enrique Lanóo on cello; Omar Murtagh on double bass; Daniel Binelli, Rodolfo Mederos and Juan José Mosalini on bandoneons; Mauricio Marcelli on solo violin; Santiago Kuschevatzky on violin; Bautista Huerta on viola and Fernando Romano on double bass. The last show given by Pugliese and his orchestra was in La Casa del Tango in June 1995, shortly before his death.

Osvaldo Pugliese 35 Works Although Pugliese composed more than 100 pieces, many of them were never recorded: of a total of 363 tangos recorded by his orchestra by 1976, only 22 were his own compositions. He was only a teenager when he composed the well-known Recuerdo (1924). Pedro Laurenz took the score to Julio De Caro to record it for the first time with his sextet in 1926. De Caro commented: Recuerdo marks a milestone in tango composition. It embraces a modern concept in its harmonic structure, in the unforeseen development of its melodic line, in the colours of its sound, in its well-achieved changes in tonality, in the appropriate arpeggios, in its original variation. It is one of the works of art in our tango that will last forever. (Del Priore 2007, p. 35) Among the pieces he wrote, La yumba (1943), Negracha (1947) and Malandraca (1948) make up Pugliese’s innovative trilogy. In 1961, Astor Piazzolla endorsed this idea when he claimed that Malandraca was the most modern tango written so far (Ibid., p. 76). In his words: Pugliese is very important for me musically because he is part of my education [as a musician]. I would slip from the cabaret where I played with Aníbal Troilo to listen to Osvaldo perform with Alfredo Gobbi. All of my music has been influenced by his. La yumba, Recuerdo, Negracha, Malandraca, La Beba. . . . This music runs in my blood. I always say that the most important aspect of Osvaldo’s works is that he found that magical thing called style. He built the Pugliese style. The way he played the piano, used accents, and phrased with the orchestra. (Keselman and García Falcó 2005, p. 122) In concurrence with Astor Piazzolla, pianist Atilio Stampone noted: As a composer, Pugliese was avant-garde, mainly with Negracha, La yumba. . . . And – agreeing with Astor – I believe that Osvaldo created many of the new, modern tangos. However, Osvaldo did not continue on this musical course, probably due to a certain doctrine. Negracha and pieces like it were really groundbreaking for the times. Then he goes back to the traditional manner, De Caro pieces, but he managed to line up an unparalleled group. Ruggiero could not play the bandoneon unless it was that style. For the Pugliese style, there was nothing comparable to Osvaldo Ruggiero. In so many years, I never heard him miss a note. It is worth mentioning that he found musicians of the standing of Aniceto Rossi on double bass and Enrique Camerano on violin; it was a whole group that helped define his style. Indeed, Osvaldo’s music could wake a dead man. I have to admit it, even if I am more of a supporter of the Troilo approach. (Ibid., pp. 213–214)

36

Osvaldo Pugliese

Analysis of works In order to distinguish the main characteristics of his language and the innovations he introduced to the world of tango, this chapter presents the analysis of two pieces composed by Pugliese and two representative arrangements of the orchestra. The pieces chosen for this purpose are: • • • •

El andariego, composed by Alfredo Gobbi, arranged by Mauricio Marcelli La mariposa, composed by Pedro Maffia, arranged by Julián Plaza Negracha, composed by Pugliese A los artistas plásticos, composed by Pugliese

The most salient features found in these pieces, which are typical of Pugliese’s language (described in detail at the end of this chapter), are: his innovative use of motives that do not constitute themes to shape certain compositions; the use of irregular formal structures and phrases (which are often interweaved or expanded to soften or signal segmentation); his wide use of thematic generalization; the asynchrony between form and rhythmical accompaniment; his original use of the rhythmical base in relation to the musical syntax, including his trademark marcato in yumba (with which Pugliese supported his extreme treatment and fragmentation of phrases and semi-phrases); the signature open ending ‘in the Pugliese style’; the use of polyrhythm or metric alternation and rhythmical complementarity; the persistent variation of accentual patterns and his recurring rubatos (especially for the whole orchestra); the use of variation techniques from Western art music (such as permutation, inversion, modulation, extension, rhythmical augmentation and diminution); variation techniques that include the heavy alteration of original motives, the use of imitation, the extensive superimposition of thematic material in different formal sections and the heavy modification of structural features as part of the arrangements; the innovative way to divide a melody between different instruments or textural layers; the sequential process of instrumentation (by increasing and reducing the instrumental density) in contrast to the traditional modification of instrumentation by blocks; and the interplay between background and foreground layers already seen in Boedo by Julio De Caro. Pugliese’s music shares a common trait with the work of the other musicians studied in this volume: keeping one parameter stable while other parameters are modified. His unusual use of orchestration – giving individual instruments (rather than full instrumental sections) different materials and functions – is a development in relation to traditional tango music, generating a more complex orchestral timbre and general sound.

El andariego Tango by Alfredo Gobbi, 1930 Copyright © 1970 Editorial Record Sub-publisher for Italy: Sugarmusic S.p.A. – Milan, Italy

Osvaldo Pugliese 37 All Rights Reserved. International Copyright Secured Reproduced by kind permission of Hal Leonard Europe S.r.l. – Italy and Perrotti Editorial, Argentina Arrangement by Mauricio Marcelli Recorded by Pugliese’s orchestra on the 1972 album of the same title for the record company Odeón Duration: 3′19″ El andariego was one of the pieces that established Alfredo Gobbi as one of the most influential tango composers. Violinist, composer, arranger and orchestra leader, Gobbi (1912–1965) set a powerful example for the coming great figures of tango. Astor Piazzolla, who wrote a piece dedicated to him (Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi, analyzed in this volume), claimed that Alfredo Gobbi was ‘the father of all’ – Osvaldo Pugliese, Aníbal Troilo, Horacio Salgán, Astor Piazzolla – and a source of inspiration for all those who wanted to make music within tango. He also saw Gobbi’s contribution in the extraordinary ideas of the orchestra led by Osvaldo Pugliese, whom he considered to be one of the most important figures in traditional tango (Piazzolla 1973). In 1930, Alfredo Gobbi played alongside bandoneonist Aníbal Troilo in the renowned sextet led by violinist Elvino Vardaro and Osvaldo Pugliese. Vardaro and Pugliese had formed a duo to play in radio stations. It is not surprising, then, that Osvaldo Pugliese, who was Gobbi’s colleague and admirer, should choose El andariego, re-creating this tango masterpiece with his orchestra and turning it into one of the orchestra’s greatest successes. The first version of this arrangement was made by violinist Mauricio Marcelli, which was later corrected and revised by Pugliese, as usual, during rehearsals with the orchestra. The following analysis is based on the 1972 recording, its transcription into musical notation from the archives of Codarts University of the Arts, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (reproduced here by their kind permission) and the original score for solo piano released by Editorial Record (1970). It makes sense to first describe the structural materials of El andariego as found in the published, solo piano score and subsequently analyze how these materials were re-created in the version by Pugliese’s orchestra, in which clear differences can be perceived when compared to both the published piano score and Alfredo Gobbi’s own arrangement, recorded on the LP La viruta (1947). The first significant difference between Gobbi’s and Pugliese’s orchestral arrangements is that Gobbi’s version is based on continuous textural layers in which the functions of instrumental sections can be clearly differentiated into melody, accompaniment and countermelodies. In Pugliese’s arrangement the continuity of the original piece is discarded, and the layers are presented in a variety of ways, often overlapping or superimposed. The second main difference is that Pugliese’s arrangement adds formal sections and extends some of the existing ones, with distinctive elements of El andariego still being recognizable. Both superimpositions and extensions are always used to create contrast and to emphasize pre-existing fragmentations.

38

Osvaldo Pugliese

Figure 4.1 on the companion website is a comparative table displaying the following elements: • • • •

the formal sections (first row); the phrases (second row); the number of bars in each phrase in the original piano version (third row); the number of bars in each phrase in Pugliese’s version (last row). Introduction

The materials of the introduction in the original piano score, comprising one pickup measure and three full bars (Figure 4.2 on the companion website), are few: the opening motive – an ascending leap of an octave with a minor second grace note – is repeated on a G and reinforces the metric and pitch accents (on the higher note of the octaves). In the arrangement by Pugliese’s orchestra, the introduction is augmented to five bars through an additional repetition of the opening motive [00:00–00:17]. It presents a metric contrast in relation to the original, as the motive starts on the downbeat, with the rhythmical accompaniment in 3–3–2 (Figure 4.3 on the companion website). The melody is fragmented from the beginning of the arrangement: the strings perform the opening motive on G, whilst the bandoneons add a harmonized countermelody reinforcing the grace note F♯ (indicated with blue circles in Figure 4.3). The countermelody in 4/4 metrically diverges from the rhythmical base, creating an opposition between 3–3–2 and 4/4. The piano destabilizes the 3–3–2 marcato through an unexpected solo note, further emphasized through an F♯ grace note. Another outstanding feature of Pugliese’s orchestral arrangement is that the opening motive is stated in an unchanging register (instead of descending an octave) and it is instead the countermelody that descends in register (red arrows in Figure 4.3), a kind of thematic generalization that is also typical of his style. This is followed by a rallentando and a diminuendo, leading to a two-bar extension – the first of many formal additions that is presented – that ends in a cadence. The position of the segments added in Pugliese’s arrangement will be marked in the original piano score with an X. Section A in the published piano score A brief description of the original material will aid in determining the wide range of processes and techniques applied in Pugliese’s arrangement (Figure 4.4 on the companion website). Section A in the original piano score is made up of repetitive motives organized in corresponding eight-bar phrases (a1 and a2) typical of traditional tangos. After the opening upbeat figure, a two-bar motive is sequenced downwards three times according to the underlying harmony. In the first bar of the motive, the respective notes of the chord are reached by stepwise motion and added grace notes; in the second bar, the motive consists of ascending intervals of a third and a fourth.

Osvaldo Pugliese 39 Pugliese’s orchestral version deviates significantly from these regularities by stretching some of the original segments and exploring the described elements. In the following, the techniques and processes applied in Pugliese’s arrangement are discussed. Section A in Pugliese’s version (from bar 8 to bar 28), [00:17–01:00] a1 (from bar 8 to bar 17), (Figure 4.5 on the companion website), [00:17–00:38]: the original theme continues to undergo transformations. There is a systematic division of the melodic line between instrumental sections (indicated in Figure 4.5 with blue rectangles). It starts with a variation of the upbeat figure, which maintains the range of a minor sixth as in the original but not the melodic profile. Musical segments are organized by rhythmical complementariness, and the melodic line resulting from that fragmentation is built on superimposed countermelodies and varied thematic elements (descending in stepwise motion, ascending in intervals of a third and a fourth). The techniques used in bars 6 to 10 – slower tempo, the use of fermatas, timbral alternation and the absence of a rhythmical base – lead to the suspense typical of introductions. Although the theme starts with the upbeat in bar 8, the beginning of the piece is perceived to be at bar 11, when the marcato accompaniment re-enters. The result is a structural divergence between rhythmical base and form, differing from tangos of former periods in which changes of this kind mainly align with formal phrases or sections. In bars 11–13, background and foreground are inverted, as both are built with thematic fragments: the materials of the theme are disguised in both the strings’ countermelody as well as the secondary voices. Moreover, the first bandoneon line in bar 11 resembles the opening motive, reaffirming the innovative technique of general superimposition that characterizes this arrangement and others by Pugliese’s orchestra, which is typical of his style. In addition, due to registral difference, timbres (the left hand of the bandoneon has less sonority and brilliance than either the right hand or the violins) and intensities, the original theme is perceived as a rhythmical background accompaniment, and the countermelody in the strings is perceived as the main melody. This inverts the hierarchical arrangement of textural layers common in tango music, where melody, ripieno and rhythmical base are clearly identifiable. The previously mentioned technique is generally applied to themes after they have been clearly presented (as was the case in De Caro’s Boedo) but is rarely found in the exposition of a theme. In order to conclude a1, the original motive is compressed and bar 17 is added, clearly separating a1 from a2. It is the first occurrence of a full tutti in the piece, which will contrast with the instrumentation of phrase a2 (again fragmented). The marcato accompaniment provides formal continuity and balance. a2 (from bar 18 to bar 28), (Figure 4.6 on the companion website), [00:38– 01:00]: in bar 18 the upbeat figure of the A theme (again varied in its melodic profile) gives rise to a2, which presents a1 in a simpler way, with slight variations

40

Osvaldo Pugliese

in rhythm and pitch. The sudden reduction in textural density strongly contrasts with the previous phrase. In this segment there is a persistent rhythmical-accentual variation that animates the original theme and counterbalances the textural reduction, while the yumba rhythm supports the constant alterations in the melodic line. The dynamic accents vary from bar to bar, alternately converging and diverging with the stable rhythmical accompaniment. The end of this phrase presents Pugliese’s typical laid-back rubato in order to clarify the segmentation. As in Gobbi’s orchestral version, in a2 the textural layers are thematically and instrumentally continuous until the extension by imitation (not literal, marked with green ovals in Figure 4.6) of bars 24–26, in which the marcato is suspended in order to clarify the segmentation and to lead to section B. This effect is described by Link and Wendland (2016, p. 186) as follows: Perhaps the most striking way Pugliese plays with time is how he creates the illusion of temporal changes when the yumba disappears. . . . [T]here is, in fact, no tempo change. Rather, in the absence of the yumba, the bottom drops from the musical texture, conveying the impression of rubato.2 Segmentation at this point is emphasized by the phrased final cadence of section A, which is presented by the piano alone, further causing a discontinuity, in this case at the level of instrumental density. Section B in the published piano score As with that given previously, this section will be first described in the original score (Figure 4.7 on the companion website) in order to subsequently highlight the alterations made in Pugliese’s arrangement. In the organization of motives (marked a–d″ in Figure 4.7) and phrases (b1 and b2) in section B of the original piano score, we can already distinguish some atypical features in relation to the regularity inherent in traditional tango. Here Gobbi shows the inventiveness for which he was praised and admired by his peers and colleagues. The first phrase (b1) is twelve bars long (as opposed to the more conventional eight) and is based on a two-bar motive related to the one present in section A: the first half consists of grace notes and stepwise motion to chord tones, and the second half consists of descending intervals of a fourth and a third. As in section A, rhythmical features are maintained while pitches are varied according to the harmony in a traditional way. The motivic structure of b1 is, thus: a (with its second half twice extended), a′, a″, a‴, a′′′′. In contrast, the second phrase (b2) is of traditional length (eight bars), again comprised of the repetition of short motives arranged in two sub-phrases presenting different thematic materials. The first sub-phrase of b2 (b, b′, b″, c) is still related to b1 by means of its motive, which re-creates the descending intervals of a third and a fourth, here preceded by three repeated notes similar to the ones in a2. The second sub-phrase of b2 (d, d′, d″) presents a different, descending melodic line (mostly chromatic).

Osvaldo Pugliese 41 Section B in Pugliese’s version (from bar 29 to bar 50), [01:00–01:46] Section B starts with a clear arrebatado rubato that is compensated for by the laidback rubato immediately preceding and following it. It is divided into two phrases: b1 (bars 29–38), [01:00–01:20] and b2 (bars 39–50), [01:20–01:46]. The rhythmical accompaniment in section B is in 2 (half notes), which differs from the former section and supports the cantabile character of the sustained melodic line realized by the strings and bandoneons (Figure 4.8 on the companion website). In this section, the textural hierarchy is again altered. In the first phrase (b1, bars 29–38), the theme is given to the strings and segmented by a registral change (in the second half of bar 30) and by the instrumentation (first tutti, then strings). In bars 31–32 the theme in the strings is again heard as a background in the texture, while the thematic countermelody in the bandoneons (based on descending stepwise and chromatic motion within the range of a third) is perceived as the main line. The material used in the third bandoneon part for the connecting passage of bar 32 is taken from the octaves in the introduction, further emphasizing the technique of superimposition that distinguishes the arrangement and Pugliese’s style. In bar 37 (Figure 4.8), a passage of connecting chords is added; its upper note anticipates the entrance of the B theme with the interval of an ascending minor second, imitated by the strings in bar 38 (Figure 4.9 on the companion website). The fragmentation caused by these two added bars (37–38) is further reinforced by the interruption of the rhythmical base accompaniment. Following this, the melodic line is again moved to the bandoneons’ background line, while the strings countermelody is perceived as the main theme. As before, the marcato in bars 40–42 supports the rhythmical and registral variations of textural layers. To begin and clearly differentiate b2 (bars 39–50), the bandoneons present a new process of thematic variation by contrapuntal imitation (bars 43–45), and they again add the octave leaps of the opening theme to the repeated notes in the original score (Figure 4.9, indicated with green ovals), once again evoking the introduction. The melodic line is still segmented through contrasts of instrumental density (Figure 4.9): bandoneons (bars 42–45), tutti (bars 46–47), piano solo (bar 48 with upbeat) and, finally, strings (bars 49–50). Section C in the published piano score Section C in the piano score (Figure 4.10 on the companion website) is also built on a motivic basis, and it is divided into two eight-bar phrases. The thematic materials are related to the ones presented in the previous sections: chord tones approached by stepwise motion, added grace notes, leaps of a third and its inversion, a sixth. Phrase c1 is symmetrically organized (a, a′, b, b′), while c2 concludes with new material (a, a′, c). Section C in Pugliese’s arrangement (from bar 51 to bar 69), [01:46–02:33] Segment c1 (bars 51–62, Figure 4.11 on the companion website), [01:46–02:16], begins with a phrased upbeat figure in the left hand of the piano in order to connect sections B and C and to introduce the upcoming piano solo and slower tempo.

42

Osvaldo Pugliese

Here, the original theme is presented in a typical left-hand piano solo against the countermelody of the first violin in free counterpoint. The first violin, through register and phrasing, is also perceived as a main line, whilst bandoneons and strings make up the accompaniment, again showing the interplay between background and foreground elements and creating a polyphonic texture. The violin material is a thematic comment: the octaves of the introduction and the ascending minor seconds of section B are used again, as are the previously mentioned materials making up section C. To end the piano solo, another bar is added (bar 56), resuming the quarter-note rhythm with descending stepwise motion found at the end of b2 (bar 50). Simultaneously, in bars 55–56 the first bandoneon creates a contrast with this segmentation by anticipating the first note of its upcoming solo, thus interweaving both phrases. In bars 57–61 (Figure 4.12 on the companion website) a new contrast is introduced: the textural density is reduced to only the first bandoneon playing free variations of the theme, with homorhythmical thematic accompaniment (taken from the descending seconds in bars 11–12 and from section B). Bars 57–62 in Pugliese’s arrangement are different from the published score not only in terms of length (6 instead of 4) but also because they present a modulation leading to the tonality of F minor of c2 (bars 63–69), [02:16–02:33]. In this phrase (Figure 4.13 on the companion website) the almost literal use of the original material contrasts with the inventive modulation to F minor and the vigorous orchestration: ff dynamics, full register, all bandoneons reinforcing the rhythmical base, now in tempo primo. Bars 67–69 (Figure 4.13) are again an extension by imitation (of bar 66), which replaces the final semi-phrase in the original tune (motive c in Figure 4.10 of the published piano score). This segment has a fourfold function: it decreases intensity; it modulates to A minor; it produces a new segmentation; and it prepares for the arrival of the following section. In these bars different structural materials of the piece coexist: the ascending minor seconds (indicated in Figure 4.13 with blue rectangles), the descending stepwise motion, and the syncopated rhythm of the accompaniment, which also follows a structure of descending half steps (all indicated in the same figure with green ovals). Modulating bridge (from bar 70 to bar 78), [02:33–02:54] In order to lead to the reprise of section A, Pugliese inserts a modulating bridge based on the thematic interval of a minor second and an ostinato rhythm in 3–2–3, a variation of the 3–3–2 pattern (Figure 4.14 on the companion website). The bandoneon plays a solo, juxtaposing thematic materials of section C, predominantly minor seconds, and the octaves of the introduction; it begins with the B♮ in the previous bar (bar 69) and prolongs it into the bridge, interweaving both sections. In turn, the rhythmical base recalls the opening motive, including leaps of an octave and a marcato in 2–3–3 (again a variation of the 3–3–2 pattern) in contrast with the accents of the strings (in 3–2–3). Pugliese defined these overlapping fragments of different formal sections as a ‘polyphony of structural elements’.3

Osvaldo Pugliese 43 In bar 76 (Figure 4.14) the reprise of the A theme is announced with the change in rhythm and direction of the interval of a minor second in the strings (now ascending) and with the marcato in 3–3–2 evoking the introduction of the arrangement and creating great tension (also by increasing dynamics) toward A′. A passage in the low register in piano and double bass connects to the upbeat figure of the bandoneons with which section A′ begins. Section A′ (from bar 79 to bar 90), [02:54–03:19] Strings and bandoneons state the theme for the last time (bars 79–83), with the accompaniment in yumba. The upbeat of the theme is presented in a manner similar to bars 8 and 18, where the range of a minor sixth is kept, but the melodic profile is not. Bars 84–86 are an extension of bar 82 by imitation (based on thematic material: descending seconds, ascending thirds) that presents an outstanding feature: a 6/8 time signature in contrast with the established signature of 4/4. As we will see later in this book, Piazzolla gave shape to his personal signature through his use of mixed meters in many of his compositions. In the final coda, the activity stops, unlike in Gobbi’s orchestral version, in which the bandoneons play the traditional variación. The piece ends with the closing motive of the theme in section A, in A minor and with an open end, ‘in the Pugliese style’.

La mariposa Tango by Pedro Maffia and Esteban Celedonio Flores, 1923 Copyright © 1949 by Editorial Record Sub-publisher for Japan: Nipo-Americana Publishing Co. Reproduced by kind permission of Editorial Perrotti and Nipo-Americana Publishing Co. Arrangement by Julián Plaza Recorded on LP El tango se llama Osvaldo Pugliese in 1966 for the record company Philips Duration: 3′29″ ‘We will play the tango, for long a great favourite of the public: La mariposa.’ Amidst thunderous ovations, Osvaldo Pugliese spoke these very words when introducing this highly successful piece of his orchestra in the live version performed at Teatro Odeón, Montevideo, in December 1987.4 There are various reasons for choosing this piece for analysis. First, it is highly representative of Pugliese’s orchestra and one of the favourites of its fans (including musicians in the field) and myself: after its premiere in 1966 it became a staple in the orchestra’s repertoire. Second, it clearly shows the typical contrasts and segmentation of tango music that were definitively established in the 1940s. Finally, it reflects the close relationship between Osvaldo Pugliese and Pedro Maffia, the composer of La mariposa. In 1926 Pugliese joined the orchestra led by

44

Osvaldo Pugliese

Maffia, who was a member of Julio De Caro’s sextet. In the words of Oscar Del Priore (2007, p. 40): The relationship with Maffia was very important to Pugliese, who gradually defined his tastes and styles. For Osvaldo, playing with that ensemble, rooted in the Julio De Caro school, was playing in the way he liked most. . . . Since then, Pugliese deeply admired Pedro Maffia, which would become apparent in the bandoneons’ style in the beginnings of his own orchestra. But he certainly could not envisage that Maffia’s La mariposa, a tango piece they usually played, was to become one of their greatest successes forty years later. However, Maffia did not like Pugliese’s version and stated, ‘What can I say? It is not my tango. . . . I imagined legato phrases, Osvaldo’s version is too discontinuous’ (Ibid., p. 106). Unfortunately, Maffia died in 1967, and he never saw the impact achieved by his tango with Pugliese’s orchestra and among the public. Still, his disapproval clearly illustrates a main feature of Pugliese’s style and emphasizes a principal trait of tango music – fragmentation. Regarding this arrangement, pianist, bandoneonist and composer Julián Plaza commented: The orchestra was influenced by different arrangers. Pugliese was clever enough to build on the ability of each of them in order to define his style. For instance, I arranged La mariposa bearing in mind the ‘Pugliese manner’, his style. Arrangers should know who they are working for (and within which style); otherwise, it is no use. (Keselman and García Falcó 2005, p. 204) Additionally, as Piazzolla put it: ‘In Pugliese’s hands, a traditional piece such as La mariposa becomes an avant-garde tango’ (Del Priore 2007, p. 67). The analysis of this piece focuses on a detailed comparison between a transcription of the 1966 recording by violinist Alicia Alonso Baeza from the archives of Codarts University of the Arts, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (reproduced here by their kind permission), and the original piano score published in 1923. In this way, changes and differences in the arrangement are determined in relation to the original tune, which further supports the idea of re-creation in tango music. The most remarkable characteristic of this arrangement is that it takes the original lyrical, legato theme and successfully produces a rhythmical and discontinuous version. Traditionally, most arrangements maintained the character of the original pieces, a reminder of the vocal nature of most tangos that – being sung – portrayed the atmospheres described in their lyrics. With instrumental tango music, this practice was later expanded towards a wider array of solutions, also related to the idea of re-creation in tango arrangement. Two later examples of arrangements that do not keep the original character of the piece are the

Osvaldo Pugliese 45 beginning of Fuimos by Marconi’s trio (1996) and Beytelmann’s solo piano version of Griseta (2004). In 1972 De Angelis recorded yet another version of La mariposa with a rhythmical section A. However, due to certain aspects of the arrangement and interpretation, his version seems to be older than Pugliese’s. Pugliese’s orchestral version is indeed an exception to the tradition of keeping the original character of the piece and goes against some primary notions taught in tango arrangement. In his educational book Curso de tango (2001), Horacio Salgán gives some basic advice for writing an arrangement. Not surprisingly, his first suggestion is that arrangers should always keep in mind whether they are dealing with a rhythmical or a melodic tango; they should also maintain the mood defined by the lyrics and capture the emotion the composer was trying to convey. The mood conveyed by Pugliese’s orchestral version departs far from the opening lines of La mariposa: It’s not that I regret Having loved you so much What makes me sad is your forgetting me And your betrayal drowns me in bitter tears5 The general techniques applied to this arrangement are, in general, those based on contrasts resulting from changes in instrumentation, register, articulations and rhythm, which clearly define a main feature of tango music. These changes are generally organized into regular phrase segments that sometimes interweave the sections (as is the case with the introduction and section A). Figure 4.15 on the companion website compares the number of bars per formal section in the original piano score and in Pugliese’s version. This is followed by a detailed diagram of sections A and B in the arrangement (Figure 4.16 on the companion website) showing the following features: • • • • •

Formal scheme: sections, sub-sections and number of bars. Theme: instrumentation, register, articulation(s) and resemblance to the original. Ripieno: if present, instrumentation, register and articulation. Rhythmical accompanying base: instrumentation, register and kind of marcato. Miscellaneous: dynamics, convergence/divergence between melody and rhythmical base, and texture. Introduction (from bar 1 to bar 4), [00:00–00:08]

The arrangement starts with a four-bar introduction, not present in the original score, which immediately establishes the rhythmical, fragmented character of the orchestral version (Figure 4.17 on the companion website). Rhythmical tension is created through the superimposition of a line by the strings playing variations on the 3–3–2 rhythm and the base marcato in 2 (beats one and three).

46

Osvaldo Pugliese Section A in the published piano score

The following analysis begins with a brief description of the main features of this section in the original score (Figure 4.18 on the companion website). As before, the position of the segments added in Pugliese’s arrangement will be marked in the original piano score with an X. La mariposa is a classic example of traditional tango writing: two symmetrical phrases made up of two motives each (a and b). The motives are regular and organized as follows: phrase a1, motives a, a′, a″, b, and phrase a2, motives a, a′, a″, b′. The tonalities in the published score are B major (section A) and B minor (sections B and C); Pugliese’s arrangement is transposed up by a half step. Section A in Pugliese’s arrangement (from bar 5 to bar 21), [00:08–00:43] a1 (from bar 5 to bar 13), [00:08–00:27]: the rhythmical base of piano and double bass as well as the ostinato in the strings continue from the introduction, offsetting the formal segmentation. However, the ostinato functions here as a rhythmical countermelody that begins the process of superimposition of elements from contrasting formal sections, a characteristic feature of Pugliese’s orchestra. Here, the bandoneon section performs the original theme (bars 5–12, Figures 4.19 and 4.20 on the companion website), yet rhythmically modified: the melodic line is fragmented by means of a syncopated eighth-note figure that alternately converges and diverges with the stable rhythmical accompaniment. It presents a wide range of rhythmical patterns that vary from bar to bar and are never repeated. This contrasts greatly with the original, where motives are symmetrical. The bandoneons also play many anticipations in order to contest the stable beat (ovals in Figure 4.20). This constitutes an example of how Pugliese uses motivic variation: the regular structures from the original version are not preserved, in fact. Motives in this arrangement frequently extend across bar lines, and only motive b is closely related to the original melody. In the second two-bar segment (from the end of bar 6 until the beginning of bar 8), the pitches of the original theme are varied as well (Figure 4.19). In bars 11–12 (Figure 4.20) a characteristic feature of this orchestra’s language can be observed: rhythmical augmentation (the dominant chord is played for two bars instead of one) followed by diminution (the original figure is rhythmically compressed). As usual, these transformations are supported by the stability of other structural components, in this case, the rhythmical base (always marcato in 2, beats one and three) and the orchestration (bandoneons always performing the theme). As would be expected, the section is divided into two, in this case by the registral change of the bandoneons’ line and a change in articulation of the strings. This organization is resumed at the end of the arrangement, in the last exposition of theme A. a2 (from bar 14 to bar 21), [00:27–00:43]: although the regular binary structure of the original motives is maintained, this phrase contrasts with a1 in several ways (see Figure 4.16): • •

a2 begins with a legato, cantabile and phrased character; it presents an instrumentation of soli bandoneons and strings (i.e. tutti with rhythmical base);

Osvaldo Pugliese 47 • • •

it expands the tessitura used; the dynamics are f; the rhythmical base plays in 2 (half notes, bar 16) to support the new character.

a2 also has several internal subdivisions and presents contrasting rubato phrasings by the entire orchestra (Figure 4.16). Arrebatado and laid-back rubatos usually balance each other. On the other hand, the stable instrumentation (the continuous melody by strings and bandoneons soli) provides a counterweight to the changes in rhythm and articulation from bar 18, which segment a2 into two, as happened in a1 (Figure 4.21). Section B in the published piano score Like section A, section B is also made up of two repeated phrases, b1 (Figure 4.22 on the companion website) and b2. Motives are shorter and changes in register and orchestration in the arrangement match this structural feature by becoming more frequent. On the other hand, continuity in the arrangement is given by the stable rhythmical base (mostly in 2, half notes throughout the whole section) and the articulation of the melodic line. Section B in Pugliese’s arrangement (from bar 22 to bar 39), [00:43–01:21] b1 (from bar 22 to bar 29), [00:43–01:00]: the process of fragmentation from previous sections continues. b1 commences in a lyrical and very rubato manner, similar to the beginning of a2, and is consistent with the mood of the original piece. As in previous phrases, b1 is divided into two (Figure 4.23 on the companion website), in this case through a change of instrumentation from strings and bandoneons soli (bars 22–25) to phrased solo bandoneon with a harmonic background (bars 26–29). On a deeper level, the one-bar motivic structure of the original score is emphasized in the arrangement by slight changes in each of the first four bars of this section: bar 22, rubato arrebatado f; bar 23, rubato f; bar 24, no bandoneons p; and bar 25, phrasing crescendo. Pugliese succeeds in creating contrasts – typical of tango arrangement and performance practice – and taking these contrasts to new extremes through higher levels of frequency and intensity. b2 (from bar 30 to bar 39), [01:00–01:21]: this phrase presents the typical strong contrast with b1, as the theme is exposed cuadrado, rhythmical and staccato, again performed by bandoneons and strings and with the accompaniment in yumba (Figure 4.24 on the companion website). It is also divided into two (in bar 33), with the theme becoming again legato and cantabile, with a marcato in 2. It presents an interesting feature, as it inverts the contrasts of b1: the first half of the phrase is continuous, while the second half is varied on a one-bar basis (Figure 4.25 on the companion website). Next comes a rhythmical augmentation in relation to the original to reinforce the end of the section, and a two-bar bridge is added to lead to the reprise of section A (bars 38–39), where the marcato of the introduction is resumed.

48

Osvaldo Pugliese Section A′ (from bar 40 to bar 56), [01:21–01:56]

a1′ (from bar 40 to bar 47), (Figure 4.26 on the companion website), [01:21– 01:38]: this phrase begins by restating section A, with the theme now performed mostly syncopated by a two-hands piano solo, again rhythmically varied, as compared to the original, with accents not falling on the strong beats. As with previous sections, this one is segmented (in bar 43) by a decrease in intensity, a change of register in the bandoneons and the complementary rhythm formed between the bandoneons playing on beats one and three and the strings playing on beats two and four. This rhythmical complement is emphasized by the contrasting timbres of the two instrumental groups. a2′ (from bar 48 to bar 56), [01:38–01:56], recalls a2 literally until bars 55–56, in which the piano anticipates the theme of section C so as to interweave both sections (here a bar is also added to the original in order to reinforce the segmentation). Section C in the published piano score Section C in the published piano score (Figure 4.27 on the companion website) presents two segments of eight and four bars respectively, an asymmetry that is common in the third section of traditional tangos. Pugliese emphasizes this segmentation further with additions at the end of each of the two segments (again marked with an X in the original piano score). This section may have inspired the syncopated rhythm used in both the introduction and section A, a feature that distinguishes Pugliese’s arrangement. If this is the case, it would further exemplify Pugliese’s technique of superimposing structural materials from different formal sections. Section C in Pugliese’s arrangement (from bar 57 to bar 71), [01:56–02:28] This is likely the most elaborate section of the arrangement as compared to the original piece because of the way in which the structural materials are re-created. As in El andariego (also analyzed in this chapter), characteristics of the theme are given to other textural layers. In the first bar the descending movement of the original melody is performed by the accompaniment, while the melody – here heard in the bandoneons – maintains the same pitch (Figure 4.28 on the companion website). The double bass reinforces this opposition by keeping a pedal point on the tonic note C throughout the next five bars. This is also different from the original and contributes to the intriguing quietness of the segment, establishing an even greater sense of contrast with the arrival of the following phrase with f dynamics. Regarding the variation of the theme (Figure 4.29 on the companion website), the following techniques are used: rhythmical augmentation (bars 57–58), transposition to the dominant (bars 59–60), phrasing (fraseo, bars 61–63), and expansion by repetition of structural materials (bars 64–65).

Osvaldo Pugliese 49 Section C ends with a passage in parallel seventh chords (the only full tutti in the entire arrangement, with exception of the two closing bars). Next, the strings rhythmically augment the chromatic motive while reversing its direction (now ascending) in three added bars that separate it from the reprise of theme A (Figure 4.30 on the companion website). In relation to the use of chromaticism, pedal points and seventh chords in Pugliese’s music (all present in the arrangement of La mariposa), Link and Wendland (2016, p. 189) observe: Pugliese embeds chromaticism and dissonances in his diatonic-based harmonic language, including applied chords, augmented sixth chords, and extended chords. His preference for the diminished seventh chord began early in his compositional output, especially to support cantando [legato] melodies in fraseo, such as in “Recuerdo”. His mature works continue to use the diminished seventh chord in both harmonic and linear roles, and it is especially prevalent in “La yumba”. His mature harmonic style also includes sophisticated techniques, like pedal points, chromatic descending bass lines, and more complex progressions.6 Section A″ (from bar 72 to bar 99), [02:28–03:29] Section A is presented for the last time with three repetitive phrases containing elements that contrast with each other and are tied together by a sustained high G in the first bandoneon that evokes bars 9–12 (Figure 4.31 on the companion website). The syncopated rhythm in the main textural layer is emphasized through the repetition of the first bar of the two last phrases (bars 80–81 and 88–89, the former indicated in Figure 4.31). The completion of the last phrase is prolonged through the use of a sustained chord while repeating the high G, which leads to the closing full tutti of the last two bars, with an open end, ‘in the Pugliese manner’.

Negracha Music and arrangement by Osvaldo Pugliese, 1947 Copyright © by Crismar Distrib. Internacional de M. Reproduced by kind permission of Crismar Distrib. Internacional de M. Recorded on LP Osvaldo Pugliese y su Orquesta Típica in 1948 for the record company Odeón, Buenos Aires, 7699 16970 Duration: 2′40″ This piece may have been named after one of the bands that followed Pugliese’s orchestra: the group of black women known as ‘Las Negras’, to whom Pugliese eventually dedicated the tango (Del Priore 2007, p. 59). The medium-low register of the entire piece (with violins rarely going beyond their second octave) and the rhythmical structures used give the work a percussive character that could be linked to a representation of African music.

50

Osvaldo Pugliese

Figure 4.32 Formal scheme of Negracha

Negracha, composed in 1947, is innovative primarily because its repetitive melodic-rhythmical structures are not organized into themes as in traditional tango (except for the brief section b2). Phrases in Negracha are presented in a regular manner, with divisions occurring every eight bars, for the most part, although the sequence of phrases is atypical (Figure 4.32). Pugliese composed a tango based on a non-tango idea: the creation of a form that is almost monothematic, generated from a few materials that are used in each section in different ways: expanded, compressed, thickened, varied and even presented simultaneously (superimposed). Although some tango melodies are based on a repetitive motive (such as section A of Agustín Bardi’s Gallo ciego), the idea of a monothematic form is groundbreaking in tango music and was later exploited by Piazzolla in some of his pieces, such as Tres minutos con la realidad (analyzed in this volume). According to Raúl Garello, co-conductor and founder of Orquesta del Tango de Buenos Aires, with which he often played this piece: Negracha is one of the most important pieces in tango and, although I do not believe in cases of spontaneous creation, this seems to be one of them: it introduces very innovative features and breaks new ground for musicians, accentuating the expressive aspect, reaching almost an exaggeration of the rhythmical aspect, highlighting mainly what is technically known as ‘marcato in three’ [3–3–2]. In the whole piece there are underlying melodies, but Pugliese decidedly opts for the rhythmical aspect, with very strong expressive features. This composition has very special characteristics, namely: a) it is one of the seminal works of reformist or avant-garde trends of contemporary instrumental tango; b) the main musical material is formed by rhythmical arpeggios and hints at milonga, where its deeply vernacular and guitar-based origins can be traced; c) the melody of Negracha is not easy to find, as it is concealed behind its rhythmical and harmonic texture; d) I am absolutely convinced that the above-mentioned characteristic [c] is the cause of its arid and rather sour spirit, which unfortunately prevents it from being included in the repertoires of musicians and arrangers alike. (Del Priore 2007, pp. 74–75)

Osvaldo Pugliese 51 Oscar del Priore remembers Osvaldo Ruggiero telling him that, at the time of the premiere of Negracha, ‘Astor Piazzolla, the leader of an excellent orquesta típica then, would usually watch live performances of Pugliese’s orchestra, whose works he quite admired’ (Ibid., p. 75). Del Priore continues: ‘the structure of this piece strongly influenced Piazzolla’s direction, and he would record it himself with his orchestra some years later’ (Ibid.). The analysis of this work is based on the 1948 recording and its transcription from the archives of the Tango Department of Codarts University of the Arts, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (reproduced here by their kind permission). Introduction (from bar 1 with upbeat figure until bar 4), [00:00–00:10] The introduction is based on four brief instances of a one-bar motive and their corresponding upbeat figures (Figure 4.33), containing all of the structural materials of the piece while foreshadowing the register and character of b2. This section begins with an interval range of an ascending minor sixth (A–F), belonging to the tonality of the piece, A minor, with its tonic chord using a sixth. This interval range is filled with stepwise motion played by the first violin and a syncopated accompaniment. The widespread use both of upbeat figures and interval classes 3 and 4 creates a strong relationship between all the motives of the introduction and much of the rest of the piece. Section A (from bar 5 with upbeat figure to bar 43), [00:10–01:27] a1 (from bar 5 with upbeat figure to bar 11), [00:10–00:24], (Figure 4.34): this phrase develops the materials presented in the introduction, primarily through a two-bar upbeat ostinato figure playing within the same interval range as the introduction, A–F, and belonging to the tonic chord A minor. An interesting contrapuntal feature is that the motive enters, displaced, in bars 6, 8, and 10, destabilizing the meter (indicated with vertical arrows in Figure 4.34). The double bass and the bandoneons play an accompaniment marcato in 2 (beats one and three) that reinforces the rhythmical structure, while the third violin presents a rhythmicalaccentual divergence in relation to the rest of the orchestra that foreshadows the 3–3–2 of subsequent sections. a2 (from bar 12 to bar 19), [00:24–00:39], (Figure 4.35): in bars 12–15 the first full tutti of the piece occurs – a four-bar upbeat figure leading to the sustained chords of bars 16–17, which in turn separate this semi-phrase from the next. The tutti is based on the stepwise motion of the beginning of the piece and the structural materials and intervals already described. From the beginning of the composition until this tutti there occurs a process of instrumental accumulation around the motive, while the motive is extended from one bar (introduction), to two (a1), and finally to four bars (a2). This procedure and its counterpart are present throughout the whole piece. At the end of a2 (bars 18–19) the ostinato motive of a1 is re-contextualized and functions in this and subsequent phrases as a connecting bridge and as an upbeat figure (Figures 4.35–4.38).

52

Osvaldo Pugliese

Figure 4.33 Introduction, bars 1 with upbeat figure–4 [00:00–00:10], with indication of intervals, motives and upbeat figures

a3 (from bar 20 to bar 27), [00:39–00:55], (Figure 4.36): from bar 20 there is a new variation of structural materials. The ascending sixth by stepwise motion is rhythmically augmented, transforming from the six eighth notes with which it is presented in the upbeat figure of the introduction to a 3–3–2 rhythm that is extended

Figure 4.34 a1, bar 5 with upbeat figure–bar 11 [00:10–00:24], with indication of intervals, motives and upbeat figures

Osvaldo Pugliese 53

Figure 4.35 a2, bars 12–19 [00:24–00:39], with indication of intervals and upbeat figures

54 Osvaldo Pugliese

Figure 4.36 a3, bars 20–27 [00:39–00:55], with indication of rhythmically augmented motives and upbeat figure

Osvaldo Pugliese 55

56

Osvaldo Pugliese

to two bars. A rhythmical tension is established between the motive in 3–3–2 and the accompanying marcato in 4. a4 (from bar 28 to bar 35), [00:55–01:11], (Figure 4.37): this phrase presents three superimposed stepwise motion structures based on variations of the motive in segments of two bars each. First, strings develop the motive in unison as an articulated, ascending countermelody, omitting the motive’s second pitch and reordering several notes. Second, bandoneons play the motive as a main textural layer, though somewhat reduced (some of the final notes are missing, which results in interval spans of a perfect fifth or fourth), with descending motion and an incomplete 3–3–2 rhythm. Finally, the right hand of the piano continues with chords whose upper line derives from the previous motive of ascending stepwise motion, but now aligning with the rhythmical base in 4. Unlike the previous phrases, in this one (a4) and the following (a5), the motives have no upbeat figures. a5 (from bar 36 to bar 43), [01:11–01:27], (Figure 4.38): this phrase is presented as a variation of a4, with an increase in dynamics and instrumental density (bandoneons play the melodic line in parallel first-inversion triads), which reaffirms the previously mentioned cumulative process. In the last two bars of a5 (bars 42–43), the recurrent connecting passage leads to the ending of section A, the last note of which falls on the first beat of bar 44 (first bar of section B). This arrival point at bar 44 recalls bar 16, emphasizing the economy of structural materials, which imparts the unity and consistency of this piece. Section B (from bar 44 to bar 61), [01:27–02:05] b1 (from bar 44 to bar 53), [01:27–01:49], (Figure 4.39): rather than an independent section, b1 is established and perceived as a bridge that leads to b2, mainly because it lacks a continuous melodic line. Its primary features are the reduction of instrumental density, the cessation of an accompanying marcato in 4 and the lyrical character (contrasting with section A, as is typical of the genre). As in the previous sections, the same material is used in the different textural layers. The melodic lines are presented in brief solo passages performed by different instruments in varied registers, which lends a discontinuous character to these bars. b2 (from bar 54 to bar 61), [01:49–02:05], (Figure 4.40): as mentioned earlier, this is the only phrase in which the main melodic layer – again based on structural material – is established as a true theme. The melodic lines started in b1 continue here as a countermelody of the main melodic layer (unison strings, doubled in the rhythmical base by the left hand of the piano and the double bass during the first two bars), unifying and interweaving the sections. The syncopated rhythmical base originates from the introduction, which demonstrates the technique of superimposing material from different formal sections that is so typical of Pugliese’s orchestra. This occurs again in the last two bars of the phrase (first violin solo, bars 60–61), evoking the beginning of the piece. The final note of this violin phrase initiates the reprise of section A with the phrase a6 (bar 62).

Figure 4.37 a4, bars 28–35 [00:55–01:11], with indication of the three superimposed varied motives, intervals and upbeat figure

Osvaldo Pugliese 57

Figure 4.38 a5, bars 36–43 [01:11–01:27], with indication of superimposed varied motives, intervals and upbeat figure

58 Osvaldo Pugliese

Figure 4.39 b1, bars 44–53 [01:27–01:49], with indication of interval spans

Osvaldo Pugliese 59

Figure 4.40 b2 and beginning of a6, bars 54–62 [01:49–02:07], theme with indication of interval spans

60 Osvaldo Pugliese

Figure 4.41 a7, bars 72–79 [02:25–02:40], with indication of polyrhythm and interval spans

Osvaldo Pugliese 61

62

Osvaldo Pugliese Section A′ (from bar 62 to bar 79), [02:05–02:40]

a6 [02:05–02:25] and a7 [02:25–02:40]: in bars 62–71 (a6) different motives from A are superimposed without significant additions or modifications, again undergoing an increase in instrumental density. Phrase a7 (bars 72–79, Figure 4.41) functions as a coda and introduces new features in all instruments: • • • •

Bandoneons play a new motive using the structural material of the previous sections; for the closing bars (77–78) they play a trill with the role of the typical variación by rhythmical diminution. Strings emphasize the rhythmical character of the section by means of percussive effects (chicharra and tambor). The left hand of the piano and the double bass play the accompaniment in 3–3–3 (again, a variation of 3–3–2) until the end of the piece. The right hand of the piano varies the accompaniment rhythm with chords on the second eighth note of each group of three.

The accompaniment in 3–3–3 establishes a polyrhythm that is a significant novelty for the genre. Just as Pugliese uses the technique of motivic superimposition as a stylistic marker, here he develops the idea further by using simultaneous meters. The last bar (79) presents an open ending – as could not be otherwise – ‘in the Pugliese style’.

A los artistas plásticos Music and arrangement by Osvaldo Pugliese, 19647 Copyright © by Warner/Chappell Music Argentina Reproduced by kind permission of Warner/Chappell Music Argentina Recorded on LP El gran Osvaldo Pugliese in 1965 for the record company Philips Duration: 3′14″ A los artistas plásticos is another clear example of Pugliese’s innovative approach in which the melodic-rhythmical structures are not shaped into clear themes as in traditional tango (previously indicated in the analysis of Negracha). These structures, generated from a few materials and well-defined interval classes, are used in each section in different ways: expanded, transposed, compressed, as solos or soli, as accompaniment, successively and even simultaneously (superimposed). Also, the sections are interwoven, and transitions from one to the other are not always evident. Of the structural materials present throughout, specific ones are highlighted in each section and assigned different functions. The phrases are irregular in length (unlike the eight-bar phrase characteristic of traditional tango) and are subjected to the process of fragmentation typical of Pugliese’s orchestra. As with Negracha, Pugliese composed a tango based on a non-tango idea: in this case, the creation of two one-bar motives with which he builds the entire piece. In fact, according to Mauricio Marcelli, who was one of the violinists and arrangers of the

Osvaldo Pugliese 63 orchestra, A los artistas plásticos is indeed related to Negracha and is one of the best tangos by Pugliese in that period (Etchegaray et al. 2005, p. 111). The same compositional construction on motives holds true for his widely popular La yumba, about which Oscar Del Priore (2007, p. 72) writes: In its structure there is only a brief theme. This theme develops, is enriched by countermelodies and harmonies, but does not change: the basis is always that repeated theme, as if it were reflected in a thousand mirrors mounted in different places. The analysis of A los artistas plásticos is based on the 1965 recording and its transcription by pianist Wim Warman from the archives of the Tango Department of Codarts University of the Arts, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (reproduced here by their kind permission). Figure 4.42 on the companion website shows the formal structure of the piece. Section A (from bar 1 with upbeat figure to bar 28), [00:00–01:01] a1 (from bar 1 with upbeat figure to bar 7), [00:00–00:15]: this phrase is clearly an introduction. From the first bar, the constituent materials of the whole piece are revealed and clearly presented. Its opening impulse is a leap of the interval class 5 that shapes much of the piece: an ascending perfect fourth in the strings and a descending perfect fifth in the double bass (Figure 4.43 on the companion website; the staff of the double bass is not shown). Either directly or by means of stepwise motion, this interval class generates many of the motives of section A. The string section holds a sustained note that lasts for more than three whole bars with fluctuating dynamics. This use of strings with underlying rhythmical ostinatos is a technique that generates great tension, used repeatedly by Pugliese in this and other pieces. a2 (from bar 8 with upbeat figure to bar 13), [00:15–00:28]: from this phrase on, all phrases in section A start with an upbeat figure that occupies almost the entire preceding bar, while introducing the shape of the ostinato motive to be used. In a2 two structural blocks are superimposed (Figure 4.45 on the companion website). The first is made up of a homorhythmical, unison ostinato, here played by the viola, the piano left hand and the double bass. The second is a syncopated, homorhythmical, parallel-voiced ostinato based on the interval of a descending perfect fourth played by the rest of the instruments (bar 7, F–C, with a B♮ – sometimes called ‘escape tone’ or ‘échappée’ – as an incomplete neighbour). By removing the note F from bar 8 on, the interval span thus becomes a minor third (E♭–C, always with the B♮ as escape tone), which anticipates the main materials of section B. a3 (from bar 14 with upbeat figure to bar 19), [00:28–00:43]: this phrase offers diverse variations on the material previously presented (Figure 4.45 on the companion website). The upbeat figure for this phrase (bar 13) is a transposed version of the motive of a descending minor third (now G–E) and, yet again, a perfect

64

Osvaldo Pugliese

fourth (G–D, descending). Subsequently, the full descending perfect fourth (F–C) is recalled (bandoneons, right hand) in bars 14–15, with a milonga campera accompaniment. In bars 16–18 the same structural materials are organized differently: strings and the rhythmical base play long notes while the bandoneons first play a motive inverting the direction of the perfect fourth (bar 16, ascending) and then compress it to a descending minor third organized as an expanded turn (E♭– C) – superimposing the thematic material of section B. a4 (from bar 20 with upbeat figure to bar 28), [00:43–01:01]: the first bandoneon connects a3 and a4 with a new upbeat figure, again featuring a minor descending third E♭–C, but now with octave leaps (Figure 4.45). In a4 three structural blocks are superimposed: a bandoneon solo, the descending eighth notes of bar 8 and the syncopated, homorhythmical, parallel-voiced ostinato now varied in pitch and in a lower register. In bars 25–28, all the strings and the right hand of the bandoneons resume the motive of a1. Section B (from bar 29 with upbeat figure to bar 57), [01:01–02:05] Section B contrasts with A in several ways: it has a cantabile character; it is made up of mostly regular eight-bar phrases; and it presents the only theme of the piece. In b1 (bars 29–36), [01:01–01:20], the soli orchestration from bars 25–28 continues with the theme, based on an ascending and descending minor third derived from the initial motive (C–E♭). The beginning of this theme (Figure 4.46 on the companion website) is clearly analogous to the motive superimposed by bandoneons in bars 17–20 (Figure 4.45). b2 (from bar 37 to bar 44), [01:20–01:39], features a transposed minor third (now Bb–G) in an extended version of the beginning of b1, played by the piano in a typical two-hands solo. It is a suspense-inducing variation that links to the following phrase, b3. In b3 (bars 45–50), [01:39–01:54], the theme is clearly articulated: a rhythmical base is performed in yumba, with strings playing sustained chords, while the first bandoneon restates the theme of b1 compressed (the last four bars of the original theme are reduced to two, resulting in a six-bar phrase instead of an eight-bar phrase). In b4 (bars 51–57), [01:54–02:05], a soli of strings and bandoneons – again in parallel motion – play a variation of the theme and lead to the following section, A′, while expanding the registral amplitude and the instrumental and registral densities. Section A′ (from bar 58 with pickup to bar 79), [02:05–02:55] In this section, the motive of the introduction (interval class 5) reappears, and materials presented in the two previous sections (A and B) are further developed, varied and superimposed in different combinations of instrumental blocks. Phrases are divided into asymmetrical segments: a1′ [02:05–02:29] in segments of 4 and 6 bars and a2′ [02:29–02:55] in segments of 3, 2 and 7 bars, respectively. In bar 62 bandoneons restate the motive of a1 at pitch while strings perform a cantabile countermelody for the first time, recalling section B in both character as well as a

Osvaldo Pugliese 65 focus on thirds. From bar 68 (Figure 4.47 on the companion website) there is a superimposition of three motives used in the previous sections as well as the addition of percussive effects (from bar 73, same Figure) in the first violin (chicharra) and in the third bandoneon (box slaps). Coda (from bar 80 with upbeat figure to bar 87), [02:55–03:14] The Coda restates fragments of the structural material of the piece over the rhythmical base in yumba. Strings play a countermelody ending in long notes to accompany the last occurrence of the motive over the interval span of a perfect fourth in its two superimposed versions: ascending (as in a1) and descending (as in a2). This again demonstrates Pugliese’s developments in relation to traditional tango and his recurrent technique of superimposing materials. In the final three bars, the first exposition of the motive from bars 2–4 is recalled, and the piece concludes with the typical open ending, ‘in the Pugliese manner’.

Chapter review and additional remarks The pieces composed by Pugliese and the arrangements made for his orchestra present innovative features that were of crucial importance in the development of tango music. He was able to develop certain elements of tango by emphasizing contrasts, articulations and other traits of the genre in a novel way. Many of his contributions were soon integrated into the language of tango and were later recreated and developed further by other musicians such as Astor Piazzolla. We could say that Pugliese played a central role in defining the Época de oro of tango, during which most of the features and materials that we know today as tango music were refined. The main elements of his style and the techniques analyzed in this chapter are summarized in the following section. Formal and melodic features •

•

Motives that do not constitute themes: tango themes are generally presented in regular eight-bar phrases and are organized according to the structural features described in Chapter 2. Pugliese composed some of his tangos (for instance, Negracha and A los artistas plásticos) using motives that do not constitute themes and are organized in irregular phrases by multiple variation and composing techniques. Irregular formal structures and phrases: Pugliese’s orchestral works introduce important formal variations in relation to the original versions as well as to earlier tangos. By adding/removing sections and compressing/expanding phrases, formal patterns that are traditional in tango become varied. As we have seen in the pieces analyzed, the aim of these alterations is to reinforce or generate contrasts and to exaggerate formal segmentation. Moreover, some of his compositions do not follow traditional formal structures: as in Negracha, for example, section A has five phrases.

66

Osvaldo Pugliese

•

Thematic generalization: a b

c

d

•

•

•

•

In different textural layers: some features of the theme are used to create or vary motives of the accompaniment (countermelodies, ripieno or rhythmical base), such as in the arrangement of El andariego. In different sections: use of materials or characteristic features from one section in other sections, such as the use of the character of section C from the original published score of La mariposa in the introduction and section A of the orchestral arrangement. As a monothematic form: formal sections were traditionally defined by contrasts in relation to themes, rhythms, characters, modes, tonalities and articulations. Pugliese’s use of a monothematic form, as in Negracha, represented a groundbreaking innovation for the genre. At the motivic level: the same motive is presented in a variety of consecutive and/or superimposed versions, such as in Negracha and A los artistas plásticos.

Connecting formal sections and phrases: a technique from the tango tradition, used by Pugliese, that consists of linking different sections by means of connecting passages that might present fleeting figures or chords. Between sections and phrases, upbeat figures, full breaks, the continuation of some elements (such as the rhythmical base) or a note anticipating the next segment are also to be found. Formal interweaving: the same material or technique is used to tie together contrasting formal sections, such as in the beginning of La mariposa. As a result, transitions often become blurred and, thus, less evident. This is an alternative to the segmentation of phrases and sections into discrete blocks typical of traditional tango. Asynchrony between form and rhythmical accompaniment: this occurs when a rhythmical base is used to interweave different sections (working against formal segmentation) or when an accompaniment marcato suddenly stops or is altered within a single section (working against continuity). Superimposition of contrasting thematic materials from different formal sections: this technique, used in various textural layers, results in new melodies that are related to the lines they are derived from. When used simultaneously, the texture becomes much more complex than in a traditional tango, which generally consists of melody with accompaniment. According to Pugliese, this was the best possible realization of counterpoint in tango music.

Rhythm and meter •

Marcato in yumba: Pugliese introduced a new model of marcato in 4 that has been extensively used and further developed by other musicians and ensembles since then. An important feature typical of his orchestra – aimed at reducing the stiffness of this marcato – is often the slight anticipation of

Osvaldo Pugliese 67

•

•

• •

•

•

•

beats one and three by reducing the length of beats two and four or by means of arrastres. Open ending ‘in the Pugliese style’: Pugliese established a new model of tango ending, consisting of a tonic chord in the first beat of the last bar, a dominant chord (with f dynamics) in the second beat followed by a rest of a quarter note in the third beat and a final tonic chord (with p dynamics) in the fourth beat, often with an added sixth. Polyrhythm or metric alternation: the superimposition or succession of textural layers with contrasting rhythms (for instance, 3–3–2 over a bass line in 4/4 or an accompanying marcato in 4 that alternates with a syncopated base) had traditionally been used in the genre. Pugliese used these techniques regularly while further developing this concept. The polyrhythm used at the end of Negracha (6/8 against 4/4) was indeed an unprecedented innovation in tango. Rhythmical complementarity: the various textural layers function as rhythmical complements, which contributes to the variation of structural material. Accentual destabilization: variation of accent patterns aimed at invigorating the musical material and creating contrasts. When comparing the recordings by Pugliese’s orchestra with earlier recordings by other ensembles, Pugliese’s development and more vigorous treatment of these patterns becomes clear. Use of dynamic accents that alter the metric structure: the extreme dynamic differentiation between accented and non-accented elements as well as their placement in specific parts of the bar, counteracting the metric structure in a constantly varied way, give Pugliese’s music its complex surface. Phrase rubato: Pugliese had a strong, individual way of phrasing with the whole orchestra, which was one of its most outstanding performative features. The recurring rubatos (both arrebatado and laid-back) sometimes occur in close proximity, thus balancing each other. This has the effect of both making the musical discourse more dynamic as well as enhancing climaxes. Rhythmical base in relation to musical syntax: Pugliese developed a technique where the rhythmical base is used to either support or work against continuity in a given section. On the one hand, he uses the interruption of the accompaniment to highlight segmentation and contrasts, often giving the impression of tempo changes. On the other, he uses stable marcatos as a strong foundation upon which to alter the main melodic lines (still related to the danceable nature of the genre).

Variation techniques •

Parametric instability-stability: a variation mechanism that implies keeping one parameter (such as the rhythmical marcato) stable while other parameters are modified. Rather than being an end in itself, Pugliese’s renowned yumba was a means for providing a strong foundation upon which to alter the main melodic lines as well as other parameters.

68

Osvaldo Pugliese

•

Ambiguity between background and foreground: this occurs when a secondary line takes the forefront and the main theme is concealed, hidden or positioned as a background layer. This is a variation technique quite typical of tango music. However, in early tangos this is rarely done in the first exposition of the theme (as is the case in El andariego), and even when used as a countermelody, the main melodic line usually remains clearly recognizable, which, by contrast, is not always the case in Pugliese’s music. Application of techniques typical of Western art music: Pugliese used variation techniques such as permutation, inversion, modulation, extension, compression, superimposition, and rhythmical augmentation and diminution. Distribution of the melodic line: one of the main innovative characteristics of Pugliese’s treatment of melody examined in this chapter is its division between different instruments or textural layers. The resulting discontinuity is unusual in earlier tangos, in which phrases, semi-phrases and motives are generally stated by a single instrument or by one section of the orchestra. Fragmentation of phrases and semi-phrases: fragmentation is one of the most remarkable features of tango music. Pugliese used many techniques in order to fragment phrases and semi-phrases into smaller segments: sudden contrasts in rhythm, register, instrumentation, theme, dynamics, articulation or rubato. This contributes to thematic variation and helps to emphasize contrasts characteristic to the genre. Alteration of original motives: motives are often heavily modified in rhythm, duration, pitch and/or melodic profile. Use of imitation: the homophonic texture typical of traditional tango becomes more complex, and imitative polyphony is occasionally introduced. Imitative passages often appear as formal extensions or variations of a motive (as in El andariego). Modification of structural features as part of the arrangement: the aspects which can be transformed in the arrangement (traditionally rhythms, articulations, instrumentation and phrasing) are now expanded to include character, phrase-length and melodic profile of the theme (as in La mariposa and El andariego). Sequential process of instrumentation: in contrast to the traditional modification of instrumentation in blocks, Pugliese used gradual changes in instrumentation (in this book referred to as an increase or reduction in instrumental density). Use of contrasting formal functions for sub-sections: the function of a given segment is transformed into a section that plays a completely different role in the formal structure of the piece. This is primarily seen when the characteristic features of an introduction are applied to a later segment of the work. Unusual use of instrumental sections: Pugliese varies the traditional way of organizing the musical materials per instrumental sections (for instance all violins playing the countermelody, all bandoneons playing the main line and the rhythmical base accompanying with a marcato). Instead, he often divides the instrumental sections by giving instruments different materials

• •

•

• •

•

•

•

•

Osvaldo Pugliese 69 and functions and therefore creating a more complex and ‘ruffled’ orchestral timbre and general sound (for instance, first violin and first bandoneon playing the main line, the remaining violins and bandoneons’ right hands playing a countermelody over a rhythmical base by piano, double bass and bandoneons’ left hands).

Notes 1 Violin and bandoneon player, orchestra leader, arranger and composer (1918–2011). 2 K. Link and K. Wendland, Tracing tangueros. © Oxford University Press 2016. Reproduced with permission of the Licensor through PLSclear. 3 According to Gustavo Beytelmann, interviewed by the author, 16 September 2012. 4 First recorded in cassette format, this version reappeared in a CD entitled Tango de Colección – Osvaldo Pugliese released by Clarín newspaper in 2005. 5 Lyrics by Celedonio Flores. Translation by the author from the original text: No es que esté arrepentido / de haberte querido tanto; / lo que me apena es tu olvido / y tu traición / me sume en amargo llanto. 6 K. Link and K. Wendland, Tracing tangueros. © Oxford University Press 2016. Reproduced with permission of the Licensor through PLSclear. 7 This is an assumed date, since there is no information available on the precise year of creation. Its rights were registered only in 1974, ten years after the 1965 recording.

5

Horacio Salgán – his life, musical style and ensembles and his contribution to instrumental tango music Bárbara Varassi Pega

Introduction Horacio Salgán: pianist, arranger, composer and orchestra leader (1916–2016) Horacio Salgán began studying piano and theory at the age of nine under the guidance of a music teacher in his neighbourhood and enrolled in the City Music Conservatory in Buenos Aires at thirteen. His parents, music lovers and frequent concertgoers, introduced him to the world of opera and symphonic music. These early experiences instilled in him a fondness for bass wind instruments, in particular a preference for the bass clarinet, which he would later include in his orquesta típica. As a teenager, he was already an improviser who was well acquainted with the genres that surrounded him: folklore and tango. Folklore was to become an essential part of his tango style, in particular in pieces such as Aquellos tangos camperos and Homenaje. Homenaje was the first

Horacio Salgán

71

piece ever played in milonga campera rhythm (derived from the accompaniment of the guitar) by an orquesta típica. Salgán considers folklore of vital importance for the emergence of tango: ‘Today a lot is being said about the background of tango and the various influences upon it. However, little is mentioned about the huge impact upon the genre exerted by men from inland and rural areas’ (Ursini 1993, p. 144). Additionally, Salgán’s style (as was Pugliese’s and Piazzolla’s, among others) was grounded in the music of Julio and Francisco De Caro: ‘Their influence was invaluable. . . . One of the major contributions to my music came from them’ (Ibid., p. 25). His life as a professional musician started when he was still a teenager, holding modest jobs as a church organist (where he could practice counterpoint and orchestration) and as a pianist in silent movies, where he took his first steps in performing in ensembles with different groups as well as developing his improvisational skills. As he got older, he held jobs in a number of ensembles, performing all kinds of popular genres in cafés and other venues. From the age of 18 he worked for many radio stations – such as Radio Belgrano, Excelsior, Prieto and Stentor – both as a soloist and as a member of various ensembles accompanying singers performing there. His decision to pursue popular music dates from that fruitful time: ‘I never felt I was a composer’, Salgán says, ‘I dreamt of being a classical pianist. But, evidently, my destiny was different’ (Ursini 1993, p. 30). He continued his piano studies under the guidance of renowned classical pianists Vincenzo Scaramuzza and Alexander Borovsky. As a result, at the age of twenty, Salgán was known in music circles as an excellent pianist of both classical and popular music as well as an arranger and composer who could also improvise in all the genres he played. It was at this point that the famous pianist and composer Roberto Firpo invited him to play in the orchestra he led, which was one of the most popular at the time. Firpo was also one of the first musicians to introduce the piano into the orquesta típica. Salgán wrote his first arrangement for Miguel Caló’s orchestra, followed by many other arrangements for different ensembles. His authorship was never mentioned, the practice of an anonymous arranger being common in tango. He also set up his own jazz orchestra with renowned musicians he met at the radio station El Mundo, where he also worked, but this proved an unsatisfactory direction: ‘After a few rehearsals I realized that my way of expressing myself was not that. I decided then that this attempt was over’ (Ursini 1993, p. 42). The definition of his true musical language came in 1944, when he formed his first own orquesta típica: The idea of assembling this orchestra is somehow linked to composing. I started composing because I wanted to create tango in a certain way. Not with the aim of being a composer, but of playing tangos the way I liked. The same happened with the orchestra. As I liked interpreting tangos in my own way, I could only do so having my own ensemble, so I established one. Some people like being orchestra leaders, but my interest was being a pianist. I had no intention of creating anything. (Ursini 1993, p. 46)

72

Horacio Salgán

This statement reflects the mark that Salgán would leave on his orchestra, which was the most distinctive feature of his style: leading, composing, orchestrating and arranging through the piano, an instrument he also used in a concertante manner, as will be further studied in his pieces analyzed in this chapter. As regards his own style, Salgán commented: I always wanted to achieve and keep a musical line in tango. My point of departure is a high respect for the essence of tango. I never wanted to invent anything new, but only to dress tango in a more modern fashion. My style emphasized an adequate harmonization of the orchestra, making bandoneons sound in a higher register than strings and often using syncopations and offbeats, which were absolutely unusual in tango at that time. (Ursini 1993, p. 48) In this disclosure, Salgán sums up his innovative traits and confirms a peculiar characteristic of his style, which remained stable without notable variations throughout his entire life. The ensembles for which he composed, arranged or played all underwent changes, but his style never did. A French music critic in the Parisian Le monde described his style as follows: The orchestra led by Salgán from 1944 to 1957 expanded the traditional form of tango, deepened the rhythmical sense and added a ‘black touch’ to it. Horacio Salgán created a new type of tango trend deeply rooted in its tradition, yet receptive to Bartók, Ravel, jazz and Brazilian music. (Ursini 1993, p. 48) As regards this ‘black touch’, Salgán, who was of African descent, explained: ‘[I]t is not a coincidence nor a deliberate attempt, but part of my background, of my ancestors. It is something that runs in my blood’ (Ursini 1993, p. 140). Some of the outstanding features of his music are possibly linked to this background: syncopated articulations, percussive elements, accents and dissonances on the piano more linked to the percussive than the melodic aspects of tango. He even incorporated ‘free percussion’, a term adopted by Salgán to refer to the moments in his pieces when musicians perform free rhythmical motives with their instruments. This effect can be appreciated in the first parts of La clavada, La llamo silbando and Don Agustín Bardi (even though it is quite concealed in the latter). Salgán avoided the use of drums because of common associations with jazz, which would have been frowned upon. His famous umpa-umpa marcato exemplifies his use of syncopated rhythms. In the 1940s, tango’s Época de oro, instrumental tango had reached its apex of development, yet singers were so important that when they performed it was the only moment the public stopped dancing and sat down to listen to the music. However, Salgán formed another exception within the tango world: his ensemble was not exclusively a dance orchestra, and it was not focused on the singer. Furthermore, he invited Edmundo Rivero, unknown at the time in tango circles, to

Horacio Salgán

73

sing with the ensemble. Rivero’s bass voice did not match the fashion of the period, although he later became a key figure in the history of tango. The peculiarities of Salgán’s orchestra and the presence of this ‘hard-to-listen-to’ singer initially found little acceptance among the public. According to writer and musician Sonia Ursini, the artistic director of radio station El Mundo even told Salgán his orchestra sounded ‘weird’ and that Rivero ‘was an awful singer’, after which both Salgán and Rivero lost their contracts with the radio station (Ursini 1993, p. 51). Yet, despite these kinds of reactions, tango musicians appreciated Salgán’s innovations and respected him. Among them was Astor Piazzolla, who by then had performed as a bandoneon player in Aníbal Troilo’s orchestra. He recalls being so inspired while listening to Salgán’s innovative arrangements for the first time that he almost lost faith in his own aspirations as an arranger and composer. ‘It nearly cost me my career’, Piazzolla once said (Ursini 1993, p. 58). At the end of 1947 Salgán disbanded his first orchestra in order to devote himself to composing and teaching. In 1950 he formed a second orchestra, with which he made extensive public presentations, tours and many recordings until disbanding it in 1957. Among its musicians were Marcos Madrigal, Roberto Di Filippo, Ismael Spitalnik, Toto D’Amario, Ernesto Baffa, Leopoldo Federico (bandoneon); Ramón Coronel, Holgado Barrios, Víctor Felice, Carmelo Cavalaro (violin); and Hamlet Greco (double bass). The orchestra also featured outstanding singers: Edmundo Rivero, Carlos Bermúdez, Oscar Serpa, Héctor Insúa, Jorge Durán, Lucio Tabárez, during its first phase, followed by Ángel Díaz, Horacio Deval and the legendary Roberto Goyeneche. In this ensemble he also included the bass clarinet, which had, up until then, not been part of the orquestas típicas. The clarinets are an instrument family that Salgán had admired from early childhood and which, due to their timbre, blend perfectly with the left hand of the bandoneons, the viola and the violoncello. Additionally, the intensification of the low register of the orchestra allowed him to contrast, support and highlight their frequent passages in the higher registers. The clarinets would also later be included by Gustavo Beytelmann in different ensembles, as will be further analyzed in the chapter devoted to his works. Due to changes in the public’s musical taste and the influx of popular music from North America, tango was undergoing a crisis in the late 1950s, the immediate effects being a dramatic decrease in performance opportunities. Salgán was obliged to dissolve his ensemble and find work playing in a café, where he occasionally performed in duo with bandoneonist Ciriaco Ortiz. Soon thereafter, the owners of this café opened a famous tango venue in Buenos Aires, called Jamaica, where Salgán also performed and came into contact with guitar player Ubaldo De Lío. Thus, the celebrated Salgán-De Lío duo was born, which, surprisingly for both of them, enjoyed unprecedented commercial success. The encounter of these two musicians also became the first step towards the creation of the Quinteto Real, one of the most important ensembles in the history of tango. This resulted from a chance meeting of the Salgán-De Lío duo with violinist Enrique Mario Francini (who participated in other famous ensembles as well, including Astor Piazzolla’s Octeto Buenos Aires, among others) and double

74

Horacio Salgán

bass player Rafael Ferro, who happened to be performing in the same venue for a time. Determined to form a quintet, they invited bandoneon player Pedro Laurenz, to whom Salgán dedicated Homenaje a Pedro Laurenz some years later (analyzed in this chapter). Laurenz had performed with De Caro’s sextet, which also brought De Caro’s influence to this quintet. The ensemble made its debut at the beginning of 1960 on the radio station El Mundo, under the patronage of Aníbal Troilo, who once stated metaphorically: ‘Horacio is the greatest bandoneonist in Buenos Aires’, referring to Salgán’s extraordinary way of phrasing, and ‘Salgán is the most valuable pillar of Buenos Aires music. In him lies everything, and he has given us everything’ (Ursini 1993, pp. 175–176). During the following year, the gifted double bass player Kicho Díaz (best known as one of Astor Piazzolla’s musicians) replaced Rafael Ferro. This new line-up contributed to a new era of instrumental tango: the era of the ensemble of soloists. Besides the fact that all members of Quinteto Real were extraordinary musicians, four of them had led their own orchestras and were composers in their own right. The story of the quintet continued in 1990 with the creation of Nuevo Quinteto Real, formed by Salgán, De Lío on guitar, Leopoldo Federico (later replaced by Néstor Marconi) on bandoneon, Antonio Agri on violin and Omar Murtagh on double bass. The musicians of the new quintet were outstanding instrumentalists. Federico (just as Francini) later became part of Astor Piazzolla’s Octeto Buenos Aires; Agri joined Piazzolla’s quintet and participated in the recording of Encuentro by Gustavo Beytelmann (analyzed in Chapter 7). The expertise of the musicians in all of his ensembles also facilitated the development of Salgán’s refined and virtuosic orchestration skills. Link and Wendland (2016, p. 206)1 synthesize this main feature of his style: ‘He treats the instruments in his ensembles with seemingly effortless and ever-shifting roles between melody, countermelody, accompanimental rhythm, or fills’. These ongoing changes lend Salgán’s music a very rich texture and driving force, which relates to Beytelmann’s golden rule of providing contrasts in order to secure continuity (see Chapter 7). This becomes crystal clear in Salgán’s recordings, in which ‘the various instruments constantly change dynamic levels as they weave in and out of prominent roles within the texture’ (Ibid., p. 211).2 Salgán continued performing in the Salgán-De Lío duo in addition to his solo work and his activities with his quintet, whose schedule was packed with concerts across the Americas, Japan and Europe. Similar to his orchestra, the quintet was active during two different periods, separated by a lapse of four years (1970–1974) during which Salgán performed in a piano duo with Dante Amicarelli, coming from the jazz world. With Amicarelli, Salgán recorded two albums: Dos virtuosos del piano and El bosque mágico, both for the record company Philips. These albums feature different genres (tango, jazz and folklore), with pieces arranged and composed by both of them. Both were involved in teaching, and together they founded a school, which, though short-lived, constitutes a pioneering experience in the teaching of popular music. Salgán’s educational vocation is also apparent in his book Curso de tango (2001), in which he describes the genre and many of the techniques used in his compositions and arrangements.

Horacio Salgán

75

Among Salgán’s published compositions are works of tango, jazz, folklore, Brazilian music and a symphonic piece with choir and soloists, Oratorio Carlos Gardel, with lyrics by Piazzolla’s main lyricist, Horacio Ferrer. As regards his approach to composing, Salgán revealed: ‘I never write based on a preconceived plan or a mould or “form”. Form emerges as a result of the creation of the parts’ (Ursini 1993, p. 142). As Link and Wendland maintain (2016, p. 204),3 it is also important to note that ‘In contrast to Golden Age tangueros like De Caro, Troilo, and Pugliese, Salgán either composed or arranged all of the tangos in his repertory’, as is later also the case with the music of Astor Piazzolla and Gustavo Beytelmann. Finally, his scores are characterized by strictness and detail: articulations, phrasings and rhythms are indicated explicitly and accurately, unlike the tangos commonly published for piano, with only one schematic melodic line and some accompanying chords. According to Salgán: This makes them difficult to read and perform, and certainly undermines their popularity. Even if I understand this, I prefer the disadvantages implied by it rather than trying to do things the easy way in a possibly more marketable, yet less authentic manner. (Salgán 2001, p. 59) Analysis of works In order to distinguish the main characteristics of his language, this chapter presents the analysis of two pieces composed by Salgán and one representative arrangement for his Nuevo Quinteto Real. The pieces chosen for this purpose are: • • •

Don Agustín Bardi, composed by Salgán Gran Hotel Victoria, composed by Feliciano Latasa and arranged by Salgán Homenaje a Pedro Laurenz, composed by Salgán.

The most salient features – typical of Salgán’s language (described in detail at the end of this chapter) – found in these pieces are: the use of syncopation as a main rhythmical configuration (including his trademark umpa-umpa) and marcato in 4/4 with a formal function (including sometimes asynchronous or gradual changes of the rhythmical base); the rare repetition of rhythmical patterns in melodies, countermelodies and accompaniments (either successively or simultaneously); a persistent variation of materials in sections and phrases as well as frequent changes of register, texture and instrumentation; the piano concertante, used with an expanded register and frequent ornaments as well as for connecting passages between sections and phrases (including connections between different kinds of marcato); the interruption of the rhythmical base to create contrast and segmentation; the use of elements from folklore; more elaborate harmonic progressions than in traditional tango (with extensive use of secondary dominants); the systematic use of certain intervals for thematic constructs; frequent registral changes (expanding and compressing the tessitura); the configuration of bandoneons above strings and the original use of the

76

Horacio Salgán

guitar and of instrumental accumulation within orchestrations; the frequent modification of the thickness of melodic lines; the organization of textural hierarchy amongst registral sectors; the use of counterpoint (with frequent passages in contrary motion); the extensive use of articulations to support the leggiero nature of his style and the dynamic accents that alter the metric structure; the thickening of the piano bass line through the addition of perfect fifths or octaves; and the inclusion of countermelodies in recapitulations, leading to an interplay and ambiguity between background and foreground layers (as discussed in previous chapters). Salgán’s music also reveals a trait shared with the work of the other musicians studied in this volume: maintaining one stable parameter while modifying other parameters. His use of thematic evocation and the frequent transpositions of the melody can also be viewed as innovations in relation to traditional tango music.

Don Agustín Bardi Music and arrangement by Horacio Salgán, 1947 Copyright © by Warner/Chappell Music Argentina Reproduced by kind permission of Warner/Chappell Music Argentina and César Salgán. Recorded on LP Horacio Salgán y su orquesta típica in 1950 for the record company RCA Victor Duration: 2′59″ Agustín Bardi (1884–1941) was a famous tango violinist, pianist and composer of unique pieces that are still performed today. The great figures of tango recorded many of his compositions: Gallo ciego, ¡Qué noche!, El buey solo, Se han sentado las carretas, C.T.V., Chuzas, Tinta verde, La última cita, Nunca tuvo novio and Tierrita are just a few examples. Horacio Salgán expresses his admiration for Bardi in his book Curso de Tango (2001, p. 30) by including three of Bardi’s pieces in his list of the twenty ‘greatest tangos’. Salgán states in detail: I dedicated this piece to Agustín Bardi, of course, as I am a great admirer of his works. Bardi embodies a curious, unusual phenomenon, as his works spanned from the early times of tango – with pieces such as Tierrita and Lorenzo, among others – up to an advanced stage of the genre with his tangos Tiernamente or La que nunca tuvo novio. . . . Each of these pieces is a musical treasure and reflects its time, its particular era, but also transcends it. (Ursini 1993, pp. 153–154) Salgán arranged many pieces written by Bardi, including his renowned version of Gallo ciego, which he orchestrated for all of his ensembles: the duo with De Lío, the quintet and the orchestra. Don Agustín Bardi, besides paying tribute to Bardi, is one of his most celebrated tangos. Don Agustín Bardi is structured upon the tripartite form characteristic of the so-called Guardia vieja: A, B, C (with C commonly referred to as trio). The piece

Horacio Salgán

77

Figure 5.1 Formal scheme of Don Agustín Bardi

reveals the main features of instrumental tango: division into contrasting sixteenbar sections made up of two phrases consisting of eight bars each, sometimes extended with one bar for connecting passages between sections (Figure 5.1). Each section presents a clear differentiation of character and of rhythmical accompaniment models as well as the closure of phrases and sections by means of perfect cadences and connecting passages that link these phrases (though not interweaving them, as was the case in many of Pugliese’s pieces). However, as we will see in what follows, other elements, such as Salgán’s use of orchestration, the piano concertante and the extended use of ever-changing syncopated rhythmical structures as a rhythmical base, including the occasional use of marcato in 2 or in 4 with a formal function, make it a unique tango that reveals typical aspects of his style. The analysis of this work is based on the 1950 recording and its orchestral score,4 kindly given to me by César Salgán, the composer’s son. In Figure 5.1, the scheme of the formal structure is shown, with indication of sections, phrases, bars and number of bars. Section A (from bar 1 to bar 17), [00:00–00:34] The organization of rhythms and accents based on the systematic opposition of the beat by means of syncopated rhythms is the core element of this first section as well as one of the pillars of Salgán’s language. a1 (from bar 1 to bar 8), [00:00–00:15]: the theme is presented in the right hand of the piano, accompanied by a harmonic sequence of secondary dominants (left hand of the piano and double bass) and by the chicharra of the first violin. These three instruments create a complex construction of rhythmical figures and accents that counteract the steady beat, while accent patterns are not repeated from bar to bar. In addition, the extreme dynamic differentiation between accented and nonaccented elements results in a complex musical surface that lends the piece its strong rhythmical characteristics. The syncopated rhythmical base changes to marcato in 4 only in the last bar of the phrase, helping to demarcate the form, a technique that will be repeated in the rest of the arrangement. The syncopated melodic line is based on the chord tones of the accompanying harmony (indicated with

78

Horacio Salgán

Figure 5.2 Beginning of a1, piano, bars 1–4 [00:00–00:07], with indication of chord tones in ovals

ovals in Figure 5.2), stated in broken chords (often in first inversion, resulting in the intervals of a perfect fourth and sixth that will be used in other sections), and on persistent ornamentation (using turns, neighbour tones, passing tones and grace notes). Chord tones are also linked by means of chromaticism and passages of stepwise motion. These are prevalent characteristics of tango melodies, taken to a new extreme in Salgán’s music. a2 (from bar 9 to bar 17), [00:15–00:34]: the theme is presented in the same register and with almost no variations in relation to a1. The typical contrast is achieved through a change in timbre (here the theme is stated through the right hand of the bandoneons) and an increase in density (through additional voices in parallel motion). The piano and the double bass compensate for these contrasts by maintaining the syncopated rhythmical base of the previous phrase until the final two bars, which change to marcato in 4 and in 2, again, to emphasize the end of the section. From a1 to a2 there is an increase in density – one instrumental section at a time – that continues in bar 16 with the first entrance of the strings, further reinforcing the end of the phrase and leading to the following section (Figure 5.3). In bar 16 the strings play in a homophonic block in a register lower than the bandoneons, resulting in an unusual timbre. According to Salgán, this instrumental arrangement is one of his contributions to the genre, and Ursini (1993, p. 173) quotes Salgán as saying: Another contribution [made by me] was the new timbre achieved, based on the inverted use of strings and bandoneons, by using strings in the low register and bandoneons in the high register. This led to a sonority of exceptional expressive possibilities and, naturally, to an innovative coloristic effect in tango orchestras. Section B (from bar 18 to bar 33), [00:34–01:05] A phrased piano passage (bar 17, the last in Figure 5.3) connects both sections while anticipating the character of section B which, as is typical in the genre, introduces contrast due to its lyricism and expressive continuity with a homogeneous legato playing style. The presence of these connecting passages that either

Horacio Salgán

79

Figure 5.3 End of a2, bars 14–17 [00:25–00:34], increase in instrumental density and change of marcato

80

Horacio Salgán

anticipate or build towards the character of the following section is typical in tango pieces arranged and composed by Salgán. b1 (from bar 18 to bar 25), [00:34–00:49]: in this phrase the process of instrumental accumulation started in a1 comes to an end with the first tutti of the piece (bars 18–20). The melodies of sections A and B (Figure 5.4) are based on the same thematic material, giving formal coherence to the piece. In section A, the theme is structured in repeated two-bar motives that are syncopated, starting with an eighth rest, resulting in discontinuities that reinforce the rhythmical character. The A theme starts with a turn, presents the intervals of a fourth and a sixth, and ends with descending chromaticism and stepwise motion. In section B only the first bar starts with an eighth rest; syncopated rhythms are abandoned; and motives consist of four bars, continuous and legato (reinforcing the melodic character of the segment). The B theme starts with a sixth, followed by an extended turn and, finally, the same descending chromaticism and stepwise motion (also extended), and the sub-section closes with the interval of a fourth. As we will see later, section C features the same elements, again reorganized. In sections A and B the melody is stated in a single textural layer where instrumental density is varied in order to differentiate the phrases and create compositional direction: from one instrument (in a1 the theme is presented by the piano) to four (in a2 it is presented by the right hand of the bandoneons) and then to fourteen (in b1 it is presented by a tutti in parallel motion). Furthermore, in order

Figure 5.4 Thematic relations between sections A and B (chord tones with ovals, turns with rectangles, arrows showing descending motion)

Horacio Salgán

81

to highlight the beginning of B, the rhythmical base in 4 is reinforced with perfect fifths on beats one and three in the left hand of the piano, which contrasts with the previous syncopation (bar 18 in Figure 5.5). As is typical in the genre (although it did not occur in a1 or in a2), b1 is divided into two semi-phrases (at bar 21, Figure 5.5) by a change in orchestration: the orchestra stops while the piano performs a connecting passage leading to bar 22. This creates a strong contrast that emphasizes the phrased bandoneon solo of the second half of the phrase, starting at bar 22. The other instruments perform an accompaniment that progressively becomes more rhythmical (by means of

Figure 5.5 Contrast between the beginning of b1, bar 18, and the end of b1, bars 21–25 [00:34–00:49]

82

Horacio Salgán

articulations and dynamics) and leads to b2. This gradual change from a melodic to a rhythmical language is particularly interesting, as in traditional tango these contrasts often take place suddenly. b2 (from bar 26 to bar 33), [00:49–01:05]: in this phrase, Salgán uses some techniques derived from traditional tango in order to re-create materials in a contrasting way. The melodic line is nearly identical to that of b1, but its treatment of texture, rhythm and accentuation is varied. b2 resumes the rhythmical language of section A, concluding the only lyrical segment of the piece (first semi-phrase of b1). Many events converge at this point to reinforce the change of character (Figure 5.6): • • • •

•

The theme begins on the downbeat. A new instrumental combination is used for the melody: violins, viola, right hand of the bandoneons and piano. The remaining instruments accompany with a rhythmical base with alternating marcato in 4 and in syncopation. The left hand of the bandoneons (which anticipate the marcato in 4 from the end of bar 23) join the rhythmical base for the first time, increasing the instrumental density and dynamics and further emphasizing the transition from a syncopated accompaniment to a marcato in 4. The heavily emphasized use of contrasting articulations and accents.

As in b1, b2 is also segmented (here into four smaller pieces). Again, different events act together at this point to mark the end of section B (Figure 5.7): • • •

In bars 29–30 the first full tutti of the entire piece is presented. In bars 31–32 the instrumental density is drastically reduced, while the most distinctive connecting rhythmical figure of the piece is stated by the piano. The ending of the phrase (bar 33) is a full tutti again: a homorhythmical passage that contrasts with the previous segments by compressing all the instruments into a narrow register.

To summarize, section A is rhythmically discontinuous (it features rests upon the strong beats of the bar, a variety of syncopations and dynamic contrasting accents that do not align with the marcato) but presents the phrases a1 and a2 in continuous textural layers with an orchestration that only changes at new phrases. In contrast, section B is first melodic (it presents the theme in longer motives and continuous, legato phrases) but varies the orchestration and instrumental density more frequently (in segments of 1, 2, 3 or 4 bars) and ends rhythmically. This refined treatment of orchestration and variation techniques is an advance in tango music as well as an example of one of its stylistic norms: variation in parametric stability. Section C (from bar 34 to bar 50), [01:05–01:40] This section again presents strong articulations and rhythmical features, matching section A and the last bars of section B. The melodic line again uses chromaticism

Horacio Salgán

Figure 5.6 Beginning of b2, bars 26–28 [00:49–00:56]

83

84

Horacio Salgán

Figure 5.7 End of b2, bars 29–33 [00:56–01:05]

Horacio Salgán

85

and stepwise motion, generally descending, structured around the main intervals already used (a perfect fourth and a sixth). The main difference in relation to the themes in previous sections is that section C starts with a pickup measure anticipating its rhythmical character, and none of the motives begin with a rest on the first beat. c1 (from bar 34 to bar 41), [01:05–01:21]: this phrase is orchestrated similarly to the beginning of b2: the melody on violins, viola, right hand of bandoneons and piano is accompanied by the remaining instruments, which alternate between marcato in 4 and in syncopation (Figure 5.8). As in the previous phrases, it is fragmented into two semi-phrases (at bar 38), this time through the reduction of instrumental density (the bandoneons’ right hands alone) and lower dynamics (from mf to pp in the score). Later, in bars 39–42 (Figure 5.9), as the bandoneons continue the theme over a syncopated rhythmical base, the strings perform a thematic, syncopated countermelody based on a chromatic figure in contrary motion to the melody that does not, however, upset the primacy of the basic tango texture: melody with accompaniment (as seen instead in the analysis of El andariego). c2 (from bar 42 to bar 50), [01:21–01:40]: in the first bars of c2 there is again a change in instrumental density, this time by means of a piano solo with no steady accompaniment (Figure 5.10). As is common in tango music, the explicit beat of the marcato prevails, while the interruption of the rhythmical base generates a striking contrast; such interruption thus functions as a technique creating formal division in this piece and in other works. To conclude the solo, the piano plays a syncopated passage of stepwise, contrary motion that recalls c1 and prepares for the return of the orchestra. c2, as in previous phrases, is fragmented (at bar 46) through different procedures that occur simultaneously and gradually lead to section B′ (Figure 5.10): •

•

•

The melody is presented legato and differs from the second semi-phrase of c1, with longer rhythmical values, fewer accents and less contrasting articulations. Also, the orchestral force from the previous phrases decreases along with the tempo. Another contrast in orchestration occurs: in bar 46, the beginning of the melody is stated forte with an orchestral tutti followed by a sudden pianissimo, while at the same time there is a gradual reduction in instrumental density, which goes from tutti, to four instruments (two violins and two bandoneons), to finally a solo bandoneon (in bar 48). In this way, the process of variation in instrumental density previously presented throughout sections a1, a2 and b1 is compressed into the single phrase c2, yet now reversed (previously an increase, now a reduction of instrumental density). The accompanimental base is performed with a marcato in two half notes in order to support the character of the segment and restrain the orchestral force. In bar 50 the piano again connects the sections, in this case through an ascending arpeggio.

86

Horacio Salgán

Figure 5.8 Beginning of c1, bars 34–36 [01:05–01:11]

Horacio Salgán

87

Figure 5.9 End of c1 and beginning of c2, bars 39–42 [01:15–01:23], (arrows showing contrary motion)

88

Horacio Salgán

Figure 5.10a c2, bars 43–50 [01:23–01:40]

Horacio Salgán

Figure 5.10b (Continued)

89

90

Horacio Salgán Section B′ (from bar 51 to bar 66), [01:40–02:12]

Section B is recapitulated with subtle modifications: • • • •

In the first three bars, the strings perform a new thematic, lyrical countermelody, a strategy widely used by Salgán in his works and arrangements, mainly when returning to previous sections. Bandoneons present the melody again, but now in the right hand alone. In bars 55–58, the bandoneon solo in the second segment of b1 now becomes a phrased two-hands piano solo in the higher registers. In bar 64, the connecting high-register piano passage is varied and resumes the descending chromatic motion of previous phrases imitated by bandoneons (left hand, low register, bar 65) in contrary motion (Figure 5.11). Section A′ (from bar 67 to bar 83), [02:12–02:44]

a1′ (from bar 67 to bar 74), [02:12–02:27]: a1 is repeated literally. a2′ (from bar 75 to bar 83), [02:27–02:44]: the first segment of this phrase has only one variant in relation to a2, which is an added lyrical, thematic countermelody performed by the strings, as in the beginning of section B′ (Figure 5.12). Then, from bar 80, the typical variación by bandoneons begins with the usual marcato in 4 by the piano and the double bass. Coda (from bar 84 to bar 89), [02:44–02:59] Although in the beginning of this section the bandoneons maintain the variación from the previous section, the Coda is demarcated by a perfect cadence in the last bar of section A′ (bar 83, resolving in bar 84, Figure 5.13) and the addition of a new lyrical countermelody in the strings. Other hints that signal the beginning of the Coda are the rhythmical base that changes to a syncopated marcato and the right hand of the piano joining the variación. Then (in bar 87), the piano alone resumes the connecting passage of bar 32 (the unmistakable hallmark of Don Agustín Bardi), leading to a full tutti in the final bars that recalls the A theme for the last time, and the piece closes with the typical tango I-V-I ending. It is interesting to note that Salgán structures – and performs – cadential moments differently according to their different positioning in the piece. After an interview with his son César Salgán in 2014, Link and Wendland (2016, p. 107)5 explain: He pointed out how his father’s style keeps the ‘chan-chan’ [tango’s I-V-I ending] of section endings legato to continue the forward motion and not to confuse them with the end of the piece, whereas the last ‘chan-chan’ always contains a more emphatic staccato articulation.

Horacio Salgán

Figure 5.11 End of B′ and beginning of A′, bars 64–67 [02:06–02:14]

91

92

Horacio Salgán

Figure 5.12 a2′, bars 76–79 [02:29–02:38]

Horacio Salgán

Figure 5.13 End of A′ and beginning of the Coda, bars 83–85 [02:43–02:49]

93

94

Horacio Salgán

All in all, the main characteristics of Don Agustín Bardi that help define Salgán’s style can be summarized as follows: 1

Extended use of syncopation: there are only a few brief segments of marcato in 4 without syncopated rhythms in the other layers. Besides, some passages with the bass line in 4 are perceived as syncopated due to the melodies with accentuations that counteract the steady beat. The few moments when the marcato in 4 can be clearly perceived are those moments when it is used structurally to divide phrases and sections. This confirms the extended use of syncopation as a rhythmical base and the occasional use of marcato in 2 or in 4 with a formal function. The moments of the piece that feature a marcato in 4 and their position in the formal structure are given in the list: • • • • • • • • •

2

bar 8, end of a1 bar 16, end of section A: the perception of the marcato in 4 is hindered by the theme starting with an eighth rest bar 18, beginning of B bars 23–26, second semi-phrase of b1, the marcato in 4 supports the change from rhythmical to melodic language bars 36–37: the first two motives of c1 are clearly separated from the following segments bars 46–50: the marcato in 2 restrains the drive of the music; c2 ends and anticipates the melodic character of section B′ bars 56–59: second semi-phrase of b1′, the marcato in 4 supports the change from rhythmical to melodic language bar 74: end of a1′ bar 80: it accompanies the variación leading to the end of the piece.

The structural function of the piano concertante: this is evident from the frequency with which the piano intervenes with soloistic or connecting passages and from the striking use of the higher registers. The central role that Salgán accords the piano in his arrangements and its predominance in the orchestra is a characteristic rarely found elsewhere in the history of tango. The instances featuring soloistic passages for the piano, their role and their relative position within the formal structure are as follows: • • • • • • • •

bars 1–8: presentation of the theme bar 17: connection between section A and section B (anticipating the melodic character of section B) bar 21: connection between the two contrasting semi-phrases of b1 bars 31–32: presentation of the distinctive motive of the piece that leads to the end of section B bars 42–45: demarcation of the first semi-phrase of c2 bar 50: connection between section C and section B′ bars 55–58: demarcation of the second semi-phrase of b1′ bars 67–74: recapitulation of the first phrase of section A

Horacio Salgán • •

95

bar 79: connection between a2′ and the beginning of the variación bar 87: recapitulation of the distinctive motive of the tango that leads to the end of the piece.

Gran Hotel Victoria (also known as Hotel Victoria) Tango by Feliciano Latasa and Carlos Pesce, 1932 Copyright © 1937 Editorial Perrotti Sub-publisher for Japan: Nipo-Americana Publishing Co. Reproduced by kind permission of Editorial Perrotti and Nipo-Americana Publishing Co. Arrangement by Horacio Salgán for his Nuevo Quinteto Real. Recorded on LP Nuevo Quinteto Real in 1991 for the record company Warner Music Argentina S.A. Horacio Salgán, piano; Néstor Marconi, bandoneon; Julio Peressini, violin; Ubaldo De Lío, guitar and Oscar Giunta, double bass Duration: 3′38″ The origins of the melodic theme of Gran Hotel Victoria are controversial. Although in the world of tango it has been attributed to pianist and violinist Feliciano Latasa, many a musician has claimed authorship. According to historian Roberto Selles,6 it could be an old tonadilla, or Spanish folk song from the early twentieth century, later labelled as an ‘anonymous tango’. Selles even suggests there might be enough evidence to consider it a copla coming from Spain. The hypothesis of its origins as a popular, anonymous song melody are further reinforced by the existence of another tango, Yunta brava7 by the renowned Ángel Villoldo,8 which presents the theme of Gran Hotel Victoria in the third formal section (Figures 5.14 and 5.15 on the companion website). In any case, the melody became famous, and the greatest tango musicians added it to their standard repertoire. Today, dozens of recorded versions are available, ranging from recordings from the Guardia vieja to electronic tango versions.9 Salgán arranged this piece for his duo with De Lío and for the Quinteto Real, with whom he made many recordings (studio and live) in the course of his career. The quintet version analyzed here has a faster tempo than the versions Salgán recorded with De Lío. The distinctive features of the arrangement include rhythmical changes compared to the original, contrasting articulations and variation techniques applied to structural materials. Salgán usually maintains the original formal sections in his arrangements, and the characteristic themes are always respected and presented clearly. However, typical of his style, background and foreground materials are exchanged in recapitulative sections through the creation of new melodies presented as the main textural layer. Finally, Salgán organizes the orchestration around his typical piano concertante, a systematic model for developing the pieces that has also become an unmistakable mark of his style.

96

Horacio Salgán

The analysis that follows is based on the original score for solo piano published by Editorial Perrotti (Figure 5.14 on the companion website), the previoulsy mentioned recording and its transcription, made by pianist Mark Wyman and shared with me for this work (reproduced here by his kind permission). The formal scheme indicates the sections, bar numbers and number of bars (Figure 5.16 on the companion website). All phrases in the original tune – a feature respected in Salgán’s arrangement – are eight bars long, as is typical in traditional tango music. Section A (from bar 1 to bar 17), [00:00–00:36] As in most of the known versions of this tango, an upbeat figure is added before each theme. In some cases the upbeat figure has two notes, which is how it appears in Juan D’Arienzo’s orchestra version for the RCA Victor album 100 años and occasionally in this very arrangement (bar 9). In the beginning of section A in Salgán’s arrangement, the upbeat figure has four notes (generally sixteenth notes in a 4/4 bar, here thirty-second notes, as the transcription presented here is written in 2/4, a bar measure that has been replaced by the more convenient 4/4). Salgán places his stamp on the piece from the very beginning (Figure 5.17 on the companion website), commencing with a distinctive piano solo in the higher registers and his celebrated accompaniment in umpa-umpa. This first section introduces the arrastre, omnipresent in this arrangement as his dominant choice for structuring the syncopated rhythms. Another interesting technique of this arrangement – employed by Salgán to alter the rhythmical predictability of the original piece – is the displacement (indicated by letter a), combination (indicated by letters b and c) and omission (indicated with a rectangle) of some notes of the theme (Figure 5.17 on the companion website). The melodic line in Gran Hotel Victoria is based on the chord tones and some added grace notes, a stylistic norm in tango music. Section A presents the usual division into two phrases: a1 (bars 1–9), [00:00–00:20] and a2 (bars 10–17), [00:20–00:36]. The two phrases are identical – in the original score they are even indicated with a repeat sign (Figure 5.14 on the companion website) – and are composed of two symmetrical semi-phrases that are repeated, a characteristic feature of tangos from the Guardia vieja. The techniques used for re-creating and bringing into contrast phrases and segments – positioned to avoid the predictability of the tune – are numerous and are based primarily on differentiations in register and instrumentation (Figure 5.17 on the companion website): • •

•

The interruption of the rhythmical base in the double bass and the guitar as the left hand of the piano joins the melody (bars 5–6, a1 is divided into two semi-phrases). The change of register in the piano, which ends the solo and returns to the accompaniment base (bar 9, dividing a1 from a2). As the rhythmical pattern from bar 9 (end of a1) is also performed in bar 10 (beginning of a2), the two phrases are tied together. The entrance of the violin and the bandoneon (both absent in a1), which perform the theme of a2 together with the guitar and in a lower register (now with a two-note upbeat, indicated in Figure 5.17).

Horacio Salgán • •

97

The interruption of the melodic line (here only evoked) and the rhythmical base in bars 12–13. A new change in instrumentation and register in the main textural layer: a parallel passage played by piano and the bandoneon (bars 14–16, dividing the second and last semi-phrase of a2) as the guitar returns to the umpa-umpa and the violin ceases to play.

Finally, a process of instrumental accumulation is established (indicated with arrows in Figure 5.17 on the companion website): from one layer in bar 1 to six layers in bar 10. If we consider textural layers performing the melody, the accumulation is 1 (right hand of the piano, bar 1), 2 (piano for two hands, bar 6 with upbeat), 3 (violin, guitar, bandoneon, bar 10 with upbeat). This process is later repeated to lead to the tutti of section B (bar 17). Section B (from bar 18 with upbeat to bar 25), [00:36–00:55] This section presents only one eight-bar phrase, both in the original published piano score and in Salgán’s arrangement. As is typical in tango, the beginning of section B is a lyrical legato semi-phrase in contrasting character to the rhythmical and clearly articulated section A (Figure 5.18 on the companion website). The phrased, soli melody in violin, guitar (in contrary motion) and the right hand of both piano and bandoneon creates a strong contrast, reinforced by the left hand of the piano, which joins in octaves the marcato in 4 of the double bass. Once more, a connecting passage (bar 21) prepares the contrasting character of the second semi-phrase. As in section A, the two four-bar semi-phrases that make up section B are very similar. Thus, different variation procedures are applied (Figure 5.18 on the companion website): • • • •

The bandoneon and the guitar perform the main textural layer in unison, reinforced by the violin a third above (bars 22–25). The piano resumes the rhythmical marcato in 4 of bars 9–10, with the left hand now in octaves. The second semi-phrase is played with a light staccato, except for a brief legato fragment at the end (bars 23–24), used to signal the end of section B and lead to the following section, C. The piano performs campanitas (bar 24), signalling the change of section. Section C (from bar 26 with upbeat to bar 49), [00:55–01:48]

As is typical, this section changes mode: from A major to A minor (both in the original piano score and in Salgán’s arrangement). It also reduces instrumental and textural density and modifies the register in which instruments perform. To compensate for the unusually short section B, this section consists of three eight-bar phrases. Of those three phrases, c1 and c2 are very similar, and the arrangement respects the published piano score. In Salgán’s arrangement, c3 – already of a

98

Horacio Salgán

contrasting nature within the original composition – also presents variations in relation to the published piano score. c1 (from bar 26 with upbeat to bar 33), [00:55–01:13]: as in the previous phrases, it consists of two symmetrical semi-phrases in which the rhythmical accompaniment is varied while a similar orchestration is maintained, following the compositional principle established by the four musicians studied in this volume that in order to modify some parameters others must be kept stable. This phrase has the following characteristics (Figure 5.19 on the companion website): •

• •

•

The melody is in a high register – with a considerable registral gap between the melody and the double bass – and texturally thickened (the piano in sixths, the right hand of the bandoneon in thirds, the violin in unison with the lower voice of the piano). In the beginning of the first semi-phrase (bars 26 with upbeat to 29), rhythmical marcato is used minimally, generating a strong contrast of instrumental and attack densities. The guitar presents brief fills that generally show rhythmical-accentual divergences from the other instruments (continuing from bar 25, last of section B) and enriches the polyphonic texture with some passages in contrary motion (bar 28). The fragmentation of the two semi-phrases that make up c1 is intensified by a strong accented arrastre between bars 28 and 29 and a change in rhythmical accompaniment that goes from a marcato in 4 to a syncopated marcato. This shift occurs in an asynchronous manner: the guitar in bar 29, the double bass in bar 30. In addition, both semi-phrases begin with a legato playing style and close with a staccato, articulated playing style (bars 28, Figure 5.19 and 32, Figure 5.20 respectively, both on the companion website), which further reinforces segmentation.

c2 (from bar 34 with upbeat figure to bar 41), [01:13–01:29]: as usual, in contrast to c1, the melody in c2 is played fully legato and phrased. Again, it is the piano that marks this division (with a syncopated, accented E in the left hand in bar 33, Figure 5.20 on the companion website). The voices in the main textural layer are redistributed, and the following variations take place: • • • •

The melody moves to the middle register (the right hand of the piano is now two octaves lower than in c1; the bandoneon plays with two hands a sixth apart; the violin plays with the main voice of the piano). The rhythmical base presents a rhythm similar to that of milonga ciudadana. The guitar performs a passage that combines elements of the accompanying marcato and of the melody. In order to divide this phrase into two semi-phrases and anticipate the rhythm of the second semi-phrase, the chromatic passage of bar 21 returns in bar 37 (it previously had the same function when it divided section B into two parts, Figure 5.18 on the companion website). It is now reinforced by arrastres by

Horacio Salgán

•

•

99

the double bass and three consecutive glissandos by the guitar that diverge rhythmically and accentually from the rhythmical base and emphasize the overall syncopated character. The second semi-phrase of c2 is strongly altered (Figure5.21 on the companion website): the violin performs a phrased, thematic countermelody; the guitar joins the marcato in 4 by the double bass while the bandoneon accompanies in umpa-umpa with arrastre; the piano presents a free variation of the melody in contrary (ascending) motion, once again in the higher registers and with chords in the left hand that diverge rhythmically and accentually from the rhythmical base. Two levels of syncopation are used: one in the left hand of the piano and one in the bandoneon; both diverge, in turn, from the marcato in 4. The piano signals the end of c2 at bar 40 with campanitas that imitate what the guitar performed in the previous phrases, while the violin and the bandoneon feature lines in contrary motion that hasten the ending of the phrase.

c3 (from bar 42 with upbeat figure to bar 49), [01:29–01:48]: this phrase constitutes a bridge to c1′ and contrasts with the previous two phrases. In Salgán’s version, the thematic contrast is emphasized by the first full tutti of the whole arrangement (bar 41, Figure 5.21 on the companion website). Then follows a variety of instrumental combinations that alternate with melodic passages and fills, usually based on syncopated rhythms. c3 is also typically divided into two: the first semi-phrase does not contain significant discrepancies in relation to the original melodic line, while the second semi-phrase presents a thematic variación by rhythmical compression. On the contrary, the accompanying base maintains a stable marcato in 4. Phrase c3 ends with a melodic passage of three instruments in parallel: the violin playing tremolo, the guitar also playing tremolo in a mandolin-like style and the piano. Section C′ (from bar 50 with upbeat figure to bar 65), [01:48–02:24] This section presents two phrases c1′ [01:48–02:06] and c2′ [02:06–02:24], in which c1 and c2 are recapitulated literally, except for the last bar (bar 65), which presents a perfect cadence. Section A′ (from bar 66 with upbeat figure to bar 81), [02:24–02:59] Salgán again places his stamp on this work when he uses the melody of section A as a rhythmical and accompanimental background while presenting a new theme, lyrical and phrased, as the main textural layer. Section A′ is also divided into two symmetrical phrases (a1′ and a2′). a1′ (from bar 66 with upbeat figure to bar 73), [02:24–02:42]: this sub-section presents a phrased violin solo as the main textural layer (although transcribed in cuadrado notation here), with the original theme cuadrado in the right hand of the

100

Horacio Salgán

bandoneon as a countermelody and a variety of divergent rhythmical combinations (syncopation, umpa-umpa) in relation to the base line in 4 (Figure 5.22 on the companion website). This same technique was used by Julio De Caro in his arrangement of Boedo, analyzed in Chapter 3. a2′ (from bar 74 with upbeat figure to bar 81), [02:42–02:59]: this subsection presents a phrased solo with a folkloric feeling in the bandoneon accompanied by a contrasting marcato (rhythmical, varied and heavily articulated) made up of thematic materials hinting at the original theme. As already mentioned in this volume, Salgán often utilizes elements from Argentinian folklore to innovate and embellish the materials in his tangos and arrangements. By maintaining the original harmonic progression, the phrase is still recognizable. As usual, the rhythmical base remains stable as the soloist performs a phrased melody. Section A″ (from bar 82 with upbeat figure to bar 97), [02:59–03:38] Section A returns for the second and last time. It is again presented in two symmetrical phrases (a1″ and a2″). a1″ (from bar 82 with upbeat figure to bar 89), [02:59–03:16]: the melody appears transposed to D minor, with slight modifications in its melodic profile, rhythmically varied and in different instrumental combinations. a2″ (from bar 90 with upbeat figure to bar 97), [03:16–03:38]: the initial tonality of A minor returns, and the first semi-phrase of a2 is restated almost identically (bars 90–93). In the second semi-phrase (Coda, bars 94–97, Figure 5.23 on the companion website), by contrast, the countermelody in the bandoneon again assumes priority in relation to the original theme, while the violin only evokes its beginning. The bandoneon resumes its thematic solo with a milonga campera air from a2′ accompanied by a rhythm in rallentando leading to the tango-like ending of bar 97. Considerations on the extensive use of syncopation In the arrangement of Gran Hotel Victoria there are only a few brief segments with marcato in 4 and no syncopated rhythms. As in Don Agustín Bardi, all of these moments are used to clearly segment phrases and sections: • • • • • • • • •

Bar 17: ending of section A, beginning of section B Bar 28: division of the first two motives of c1 Bar 32: separation of the last motive of c1 Bars 48–49: ending of section C, beginning of section C′ Bar 52: division of the first two motives of c1′ Bar 56: separation of the last motive of c1′ Bar 65: ending of section C, signals the return of section A (A′) Bar 81: ending of section A′ Bar 94: beginning of the Coda.

Horacio Salgán

101

Homenaje a Pedro Laurenz Music and arrangement by Horacio Salgán, 1993 Copyright © by Warner/Chappell Music Argentina Reproduced by kind permission of Warner/Chappell Music Argentina Recorded by Nuevo Quinteto Real on LP Timeless Tango, 1996, for the record company Forever Music. Horacio Salgán, piano; Néstor Marconi, bandoneon; Antonio Agri, violin; Ubaldo De Lío, guitar and Omar Murtagh, double bass Duration: 3′10″ Homenaje a Pedro Laurenz is an atypical piece both in terms of Salgán’s style and when compared with traditional tangos, mainly due to its noteworthy formal structure (A, B, Coda), the framework of its sections (each consisting of three mainly asymmetrical phrases plus a bridge), its frequent and unusual modulations and its bass line with numerous pedal points. Modulations in this piece are also unusual as they do not follow the typical pattern in traditional tango, which commonly moves between parallel, relative or closely related tonalities. In contrast, Homenaje a Pedro Laurenz presents the following tonalities: A minor, F♯ minor, B minor, A minor, E minor and G minor. Salgán declared that it took him ten years to complete the composition: he changed the second part many times and even tried different orchestrations because he was not satisfied with any of them (Ursini 1993, p. 157). Perhaps because it was written as a posthumous tribute to his colleague and friend Pedro Laurenz – bandoneonist in De Caro’s sextet and the first bandoneon player of the Quinteto Real – it lacks the strong rhythmical and articulated language so characteristic of Salgán’s works, featuring instead a slower tempo and more limited tessitura than usual. The piano concertante does not appear in this piece either, leaving more room for the bandoneon as a solo instrument (and as part of the tribute itself) as well as the violin, whose voice, due to its natural lyricism, is more akin to the spirit of the piece. However, aspects related to orchestration, texture and variation techniques lend the piece a sense of discontinuity that is typical of Salgán’s style. The reasons that led Salgán to write this work can be summarized in this excerpt from his talks with Sonia Ursini (Ibid., p. 158): Pedro Laurenz was one of the greatest authors and interpreters of tango, one of the relevant figures in the history of the genre. As the first bandoneon in Julio De Caro’s orchestra, his influence was crucial. I was lucky to be in direct contact with him, as he was part of Quinteto Real. When he joined the ensemble it had been almost twenty years since he had last played the bandoneon and been on stage. Despite this, his performance was brilliant, really beyond comparison. Salgán – who was well acquainted with the classical repertoire – may have built the piece upon the theme of the recitative preceding the aria ‘When I am laid in

102

Horacio Salgán

earth’, from the opera Dido and Aeneas by Henry Purcell. The aria is a famous example of the musical form of a lamento, which expresses pain or mourning, and presents an ostinato bass line characterized by a descending chromatic figure, which in Homenaje is also used as thematic material. The lamento was a core element of Italian opera in the seventeenth century that Salgán admired and with which the melodic lines and lyricism of tangos might be historically related. In her book, Sonia Ursini (1993) repeatedly writes about Salgán’s passion for opera, as he was well acquainted with the genre from an early age, regularly attending Teatro Colón with his parents. The integration of materials from a musical form alien to both the world of tango and Salgán’s own style might be the main creative impulse for this unconventional piece which, despite representing an exception among his works, also reflects his style while pushing the boundaries of tango further. The similarities between ‘When I am laid in earth’ and Homenaje are undeniable. Figures 5.24 and 5.25 on the companion website show how Purcell’s piece10 might have given Salgán the distinctive melody which shaped the character of his work. This analysis of Homenaje a Pedro Laurenz is based on the previously mentioned recording and its transcription from the archives of Codarts University of the Arts, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (reproduced here by their kind permission). The formal scheme (Figure 5.26 on the companion website) shows sections and phrases (with bar numbers) to facilitate the analysis. Introduction (from bar 1 with upbeat to bar 6), [00:00–00:19] The introduction is divided into two fragments (Figure 5.27 on the companion website). The first (bar 1 with upbeat to bar 2) is perceived as an introduction to the introduction, the latter starting in bar 3 over the harmony in A minor. Despite the slow tempo and the sombre character, syncopated rhythms – a distinctive feature of Salgán’s works – are presented both in the melody and in the accompaniment. This is further emphasized by eighth-note rests on the first beat of many bars in the main textural layer and by the rhythmical base which establishes the use of syncopation that is omnipresent in the A theme. The melodic line, which moves within the interval of a third (major and minor) is based on repeated pitches, octave leaps, chromaticism and a descending stepwise motion that corresponds to the lamento. The bass line pedal alternates between dominant and tonic. Section A (from bar 7 to bar 28), [00:19–01:23] a1 (from bar 7 to bar 15), [00:19–00:45], (Figure 5.28): presents a phrased bandoneon solo within the range of a minor third by stepwise motion, as in the introduction. The main theme consists of long notes that are generally played on the downbeat (in contrast to the introduction), always preceded by an upbeat figure of small rhythmical values (already present in the introduction) and the expressive acciaccatura by leap of a descending octave ‘in the Ciriaco style’ (indicated in

Horacio Salgán

103

Figure 5.28 on the companion website). The latter is an expressive device introduced by bandoneon player Ciriaco Ortiz (1908–1970), consisting of an acciaccatura placed an octave above the real note. This gesture was incorporated into the idiomatic features of the instrument and has been widely used by bandoneon players – in Astor Piazzolla’s solos, for example – ever since. Salgán was surely exposed to this device during his performances with Ciriaco Ortiz. As in the arrangement of La mariposa by Pugliese’s orchestra, the materials presented as the main textural layer of the introduction of Homenaje continue, from the first phrase on, as an accompanying countermelody. In doing so, the process of superimposition of materials from different formal sections – as already seen in Pugliese’s works – begins, which is uncommon in Salgán’s music. Another distinctive feature at the beginning of a1 is the pedal in the bass line over the tonic A during the first four bars (bars 7–10). This emphasizes the differentiation between the introduction and the theme, while reversing the standard model, since a pedal point would typically be used in the introduction, and a rhythmical base would begin at the start of the theme. In bar 11 the syncopated marcato returns, contributing, along with the bandoneon line, to the division of this first phrase into two semi-phrases. This segmentation is further reinforced by the accompaniment of the piano and by the violin, which increases its rhythmical density and dynamics in bar 10. The end of a1 (bars 13–14) is signalled by the change of marcato (here in 2) – a technique we have already analyzed in other pieces by Salgán, by the tutti downbeat and by the metric extension (bar 15, 2/4) with irregular values (eighth-note triplets). In bars 14–15 the descending motion that prevailed in a1 is inverted: the bandoneon and the violin shift to the high register – where a2 will begin – by means of a connecting passage, again based on stepwise motion and arpeggios of a minor third, that modulates to F♯ minor. a2 (from bar 16 to bar 22), [00:45–01:05]: this phrase is a contrasting variation of a1. It presents greater dynamics, instrumental density and tessitura as well as a different tonality (F♯ minor). The violin, the bandoneon and the guitar state the main textural layer, always within a minor third, while the rhythmical base resumes its syncopated accompaniment (Figure 5.29 on the companion website). Inversely to a1, the segmentation in a2 (from bar 20, Figure 5.30 on the companion website) features a registral, textural and dynamic reduction in which the orchestration resembles bar 7 and a new modulation (in this case to B minor). This results in a kind of formal symmetry, which creates a relationship between the structure of the first four bars of a1 and the last three bars of a2. The syncopated bass line is again static in pitch – presenting a pedal first over F♯ and then over B – while the harmonies move by chromatic and diatonic stepwise motion, maintaining the motive of the introduction. a3 (from bar 23 to bar 28), [01:05–01:23]: the form of this phrase is particularly ambiguous. Its beginning (Figure 5.31 on the companion website) could be perceived as either a modulating bridge leading to the last exposition of the A theme (in bar 26) or simply as a strongly altered phrase. It contrasts radically with the syncopated phrases that precede it, as a steady quarter-note pulse is now emphasized. The double bass again plays a pedal over the harmony of E7, leading to the

104

Horacio Salgán

A minor in bar 26, where it resumes the descending lamento motive. The piano again combines materials from different formal sections: a chordal passage with the quarter-note line of the violin and campanitas (octave leaps on E) derived from the introduction. The previously presented materials are then restated, and a variation of the theme of a1 is played on the bandoneon (bars 26–29), with a link to the previous segment established through a continuation of the piano’s octave leaps on E (Figure 5.31 on the companion website). Bridge (from bar 29 to bar 33), [01:23–01:37], (Figure 5.32 on the companion website): this is a variation of bars 3–6 in the introduction and acts as a modulating bridge to section B. It presents the tonalities of E minor and G major, the latter maintained until the end of the piece. Section B (from bar 34 to bar 61), [01:37–02:44] This section contrasts with section A mainly because of its more regular phrases and the use of marcato in 4, in which the double bass finally moves as is typical in the genre: playing chord tones in a repeated quarter-note rhythm. b1 (from bar 34 to bar 40), [01:37–01:56], (Figure 5.33 on the companion website): in this phrase, the violin presents a new theme featuring materials similar to the ones comprising section A (stepwise motion, thirds, arpeggios of eighthnote triplets). As can be heard in the recording, the theme enters in anticipation of the first beat of the bar even when notated on the downbeat, a typical gesture in tango phrasing. As was the case in all the previous phrases, b1 is divided into two, now by registral contrast (the violin one octave higher in bar 38) and by instrumental contrast (the melodic line is thickened when the bandoneon joins in bar 37 and the piano in bar 39). The guitar maintains the accompaniment by playing tremolo in a mandolin-like style, tying both semi-phrases together. At the end of bar 40, a passage in parallel motion by the violin and the piano helps to connect b1 and b2. b2 (from bar 41 to bar 48), [01:56–02:16], (Figure 5.34 on the companion website): this phrase starts with a left-hand bandoneon solo playing a variation of the violin solo in b1. The contrast in registral and textural density is supported by the double bass that continues in 4 (with the guitar on the upbeats) – reinforced by the chicharra of the violin – with a gradual accelerando that leads to the faster tempo of b3. b2 is less clearly segmented than the previous phrases, giving it a more continuous feel. Bridge (from bar 49 to bar 52), [02:16–02:25]: this is another formally ambiguous segment. It can be perceived as either an extension of b2 or as a bridge to b3. The melodic line is based on the materials previously used (stepwise motion and thirds). The accompaniment maintains the marcato in 4 from b2, while stabilizing the new tempo, to later resume the syncopation of the beginning. b3 (from bar 53 to bar 61), [02:25–02:44], (Figure 5.35 on the companion website): this phrase states the last variation of the B theme, more easily recognized by its harmonic progression than by its melodic line. It begins similarly to b1, with a phrased violin solo that again enters prior to the downbeat (even if notated on

Horacio Salgán

105

the downbeat) and clearly separated from b2 through both a contrast in instrumental density and, for the first time, an interruption in the rhythmical base. This last version of b is based on the variación by rhythmical compression that is typical of the genre, although stated in a discontinuous way. Discontinuity results from the following factors: • • •

The bandoneon line contains rests that divide it into asymmetrical segments. The right hand of the piano reinforces the variación of the bandoneon a minor third higher in bars 56 and 60–61, while the left hand maintains the marcato. The violin plays a melodic line that alternates materials from its phrased solo, the repeated quarter-note rhythms from previous sections and upbeat figures made up of sixteenth notes that emulate and sometimes complement the variación of the bandoneon. These materials are organized by register: the segments of the phrased solo in the higher register, the rest in the lower register.

Coda (from bar 62 with upbeat to bar 70), [02:44–03:10]: at the end of the variación (bar 61), the bandoneon performs a brief passage alone, based on thematic materials that link section B and the Coda. The Coda, in turn, is divided again through frequent variations in instrumentation until a parallel passage in full tutti at bar 67 that slows the tempo down with the typical laid-back rubato triplet (Figure 5.36 on the companion website). The tresillo abierto [open triplet], as it is commonly known in tango jargon, is generally used for performing a laid-back rubato. Its typical pattern is the one shown in the last bar of Figure 5.36 on the companion website: two quarter notes and two eighth notes that are jointly ‘stretched out’ with a crescendo that emphasizes the rubato. In the final three bars, the violin and the bandoneon play the main melody, and the piece concludes with the typical tango I-V-I ending.

Chapter review and additional remarks The pieces composed and arranged by Salgán feature, on the one hand, innovative elements that contributed to the development of the genre and, on the other, some typical aspects of tango music that he advanced further, which have now become strictly linked to his style. The main techniques analyzed in this chapter are summarized in the following sections. Formal and melodic features •

Segmentation of sections: Salgán generally respects regular sections and phrases typical of tango – both in the creation and re-creation of pieces – but counteracts the resulting symmetries with the persistent variation of their constitutive materials and through ceaseless contrasts in diverse parameters. Occasionally, phrases are extended to signal formal changes (a device already seen in Pugliese’s works).

106 •

•

•

• •

•

•

•

Horacio Salgán Use of ornaments: in order to reinforce the articulated character of his language, Salgán uses a variety of ornamental effects and sounds from the tango tradition, including passing notes and grace notes, neighbour tones, acciaccaturas, turns and campanitas. This can be heard particularly in his virtuoso way of articulating on the piano. Shifting, omitting or combining notes from the theme: these compelling techniques are used for altering rhythmical and melodic predictability, as they thwart the listeners’ expectations. Salgán does this in order to make simple or similar structures more complex (as in Gran Hotel Victoria) and introduces them mainly in recapitulative phrases. Connecting passages: another characteristic technique, taken by Salgán from the tango tradition, is that of tying different sections together by means of connecting passages that might present complete melodies, brief figures or chords and that often extend the phrases of one bar. Through a single accented note, alone, he manages to mark a tempo change (as seen in the arrangement of Gran Hotel Victoria) or connect two contrasting segments. In many cases these figures are performed by the piano, which reinforces the concertante approach of the piano being the main instrument. In his book on tango, Salgán (2001, p. 61) divides these kinds of passages into ‘affirming’, when they keep the character of the groups they link, and ‘preparatory’, when they announce the beginning of a new phrase with a different character. The interweaving of fragments, however, is less common in his music than it was in Pugliese’s. These formal construction aspects will be further discussed in the general conclusions. Emphasis on thematic contrasts: thematic contrasts typical of tango (primarily rhythmical versus primarily melodic sections) are emphasized with changes of texture, orchestration and register. Use of elements from the language of folklore: Salgán uses rhythms, phrases and melodies derived from Argentinian folklore, a language he practiced and knew well. Making use of them, he enriched his works while rescuing an essential element from the origins of tango. Elaborate harmonic progressions: Salgán enriches his pieces by using harmonic progressions that are more intricate than those used in tangos from previous eras. The most frequent use of this technique is with secondary dominants, for example at the beginning of Don Agustín Bardi. Formal segmentation: formal sections are generally well defined, and the development of their materials is based mainly on rhythmical, timbral and textural modifications or the addition of new elements. The combination of materials from different sections and the interweaving of segments are infrequent in Salgán’s music. In this respect, the techniques analyzed in Homenaje a Pedro Laurenz constitute an exception. Thematic constructs based upon intervals: many pieces by Salgán are based on the systematic use of certain intervals. For example, the themes of the three sections of Don Agustín Bardi are built around the interval span of a minor sixth.

Horacio Salgán

107

Orchestration •

•

•

•

•

•

•

Use of piano concertante: Salgán organizes the orchestration around his typical piano concertante, which not only represents an unmistakable mark of his style but is also a systematic model for building up the pieces. The role of the piano concertante is defined by the continuous interventions of this instrument in countermelodies, connecting passages, solos, fills, accompaniments and marcatos. The piano is the instrument from which he leads his ensembles and around which he structures his pieces. This structural centrality of the piano in his arrangements and its predominance in the orchestra are rarely found elsewhere in the history of tango. Another feature of his piano playing is the brilliant use of phrasing and the diversity of articulations deployed by Salgán in his interpretations. Finally, he uses each hand to play passages – drawn from a wide trove of possible and varying functions – which both expand the orchestration and enrich the polyphonic texture. Use of expanded piano register: another outstanding feature of Salgán’s piano is the expanded tessitura. He frequently uses all registers of the piano, especially the highest one, which he employs in order to add colour and highlight the passages of piano concertante. For this, the left hand often abandons the rhythmical marcato momentarily and complements the right hand in the higher registers. The leggiero sound of his style might also be linked to this aspect. Frequent registral changes: in his orchestrations, Salgán frequently compresses and expands the tessitura. This procedure is complemented by textural and instrumental variations and is aimed – as with many other aspects in tango – at generating contrasts. Inversion of the strings and the bandoneons: in his instrumentations for orquesta típica and often for the quintet as well, Salgán frequently uses the configuration of bandoneons above violins, which results in an uncommon and distinctive timbre. Use of the guitar: Salgán uses the guitar in his ensembles mainly as a contrapuntal instrument. It generally presents rhythmical-accentual contrasts to the rest of the instruments, but also enriches the polyphonic texture with passages in contrary motion. These passages either counteract the metric structure, link segments or alternate between materials from either the accompaniment or the melody. Frequent changes of register, texture and instrumentation (gradual or sudden): changes in instrumentation (with subsequent implications for timbre, register and texture) are found more frequently than in tangos of previous eras. In general, solos alternate with instrumental blocks (of full tutti or soli). This creates a sense of discontinuity that contributes to a foundational stylistic norm of tango music while giving his pieces a unique signature. Instrumental accumulation: in contrast to the traditional modification of instrumentation in blocks, Salgán makes gradual changes, as already seen

108

•

•

•

Horacio Salgán occasionally in Pugliese’s works. This represents one of the historic developments of tango orchestration. Thickening of the melodic line: a thematic approach derived from the tradition and used systematically by Salgán is the frequent modification of a melodic line’s thickness. This, along with variations in register, is used to generate the typical contrasts of the genre. The thickening of the melody is used to emphasize phrases or to compensate for the loss of intensity in the higher registers of the piano. Textural hierarchy amongst distinct registral sectors: a single instrument or an instrumental section uses different sectors of the register in order to differentiate thematic from accompanimental layers. This is found, for example, in the violin line over the last variación in Homenaje a Pedro Laurenz, where the segments of the phrased solo are performed in the higher register and the accompaniment segments in the lower register. This kind of registral arrangement is used mainly in small ensembles to compensate for the use of different registral sectors and instrumental combinations within the orquesta típica. Passages of contrary motion: Salgán systematically superimposes lines that counteract the general direction of a given line. In this way, his music presents more elaborate contrapuntal characteristics than those of previous times. Piazzolla and Beytelmann later developed these characteristics in their own works.

Rhythm and meter •

•

• •

Rhythmical variations: in melodies, countermelodies and accompaniments, rhythmical patterns are rarely repeated, either successively or simultaneously. Moreover, the changes in the accompanying marcato occur more frequently than in the tangos of the Guardia vieja, where they would usually align with whole phrases or semi-phrases. These frequent changes are always related to the main theme; they grant fluency to the theme’s development and contribute to a more leggiero character (which is also linked to the persistent use of syncopated rhythms to animate the metric structure). Use of syncopated rhythms: a characteristic feature of Salgán’s music is the omnipresent use of syncopated rhythms, employed to dynamize the rhythmical aspect of his works. The use of upbeats, arrastres, rhythmical shifts that alter the metric structure and phrases beginning with a rest on the downbeat results in a complex musical surface while remaining in the typical 4/4 meter. This is clearly exemplified by the umpa-umpa, the rhythmical base that carries Salgán’s signature. In this respect, he may have worked more on rhythmical and accentual structures than any other musician of his era. Use of accents, staccato and legato in two: in order to support the leggiero and syncopated language of his style, Salgán makes use of passages that continuously present highly articulated staccatos and legatos. Use of dynamic accents that alter the metric structure: the extreme dynamic differentiation between accented and non-accented elements as well as their

Horacio Salgán

•

•

• •

•

•

109

placement in specific parts of the bar to counteract the metric structure in a constantly varied manner grant Salgán’s music both its leggiero and volatile aspects. Connection of different marcatos: the accompanimental bases written by Salgán often present more frequent changes and contrasts than was usual in the genre. By means of connecting passages between different marcatos, Salgán compensates for the resulting discontinuity and gives fluency to his works. As regards this technique, his book Curso de tango (Salgán 2001, pp. 47–48) provides many related examples. Interruption of the rhythmical base: this technique can be found in some traditional tangos (particularly in orchestrations by Juan D’Arienzo) and is used for creating contrasts or dividing sections. In the case of Salgán’s works, the resulting effect is particularly salient because the interruption of the rhythmical base contrasts strongly with the rich, ever-changing accompanimental motives, rhythms and articulations. Anticipation of rhythms: some lines anticipate rhythms or marcatos of subsequent segments. Asynchrony in changes of rhythmical base: changes in the accompanying rhythmical base are staggered in the different textural layers, as occurs in Gran Hotel Victoria, where the passage from a marcato in 4 to a syncopated marcato is first performed by the guitar (bar 29) and then by the double bass (bar 30). This enriches the rhythmical, accentual and textural organization. Gradual changes in the accompaniment base: as in phrase b1 of Don Agustín Bardi, the marcato progressively becomes more rhythmical by means of the durations, articulations and dynamics used. This gradual change from a fragment of melodic tango to one of rhythmical tango is quite innovative, as in tangos from previous eras these contrasts usually occur suddenly or through an accellerando only. Thickening of the piano bass line: in some accompanying bases, Salgán reinforces accented beats through thickening the bass line of the piano left hand, generally with intervals of a perfect fifth or octaves. This technique is highly useful and can be applied to any marcato, as will be seen later in the analysis of Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi by Astor Piazzolla and Preludio n. 1 by Gustavo Beytelmann.

Variation techniques •

•

Variation in parametric stability: a variation mechanism that implies keeping one parameter stable while other parameters are modified. Salgán’s works often feature fragments that vary the accompanying rhythmical base while keeping a similar orchestration within phrases or semi-phrases. This supports the notion of the core role of rhythm in his works. Additional countermelodies in recapitulations: another aspect derived from tradition that is emphasized and systematized by Salgán is the creation of new themes for recapitulative sections and is related to the concept of ambiguity

110

•

•

Horacio Salgán between background and foreground layers, as analyzed in the chapters on De Caro and Pugliese. This may take place: (1) at the level of the main textural layer, when the new line occurs in the foreground and the original theme is disguised, hidden or presented as a background or ripieno, or (2) as a countermelody, when the original theme still occurs in the foreground and the countermelody is added as a variation technique. The added lines may (1) be contrasting: if the original theme is rhythmical, the countermelody is melodic, and vice versa, or (2) have similar characteristics: the themes are both rhythmical or both melodic. An example of the latter is the famous rhythmical countermelody created by Salgán for the variación of Recuerdo by Osvaldo Pugliese. Furthermore, due to their thematic characteristics, these added lines are often presented as complete themes, and some of them even evolved as the main melodic lines of new compositions, as in the case of Motivo de vals, which was derived from the countermelody composed for Llorarás. Salgán’s countermelodies – created for the arrangements El entrerriano (analyzed in this volume, Chapter 8), Retirao, El Pollito, Shusheta and La clavada – are also renowned. All of these composition techniques further contribute to the idea of the arranger as re-creator. Thematic evocation: another innovative approach in comparison with the standard practices in recapitulative sections is the arrangement of segments made up of thematic materials that evoke the original theme without presenting it in full. This takes place in Salgán’s arrangement of Gran Hotel Victoria, where the original theme’s harmonic progression is the only element kept intact, allowing the recapitulation to be perceived. Thematic evocation is an innovative variation technique that was further developed by Beytelmann in many of his pieces (as will be analyzed in Chapter 7, focused on his works). Frequent transpositions of the melody: this thematic variation technique is present in Homenaje a Pedro Laurenz. Although Salgán does not use this technique systematically in his creations, it constitutes a traceable precedent for later works by Piazzolla and Beytelmann.

Notes 1 K. Link and K. Wendland, Tracing tangueros. © Oxford University Press 2016. Reproduced with permission of the Licensor through PLSclear. 2 K. Link and K. Wendland, Tracing tangueros. © Oxford University Press 2016. Reproduced with permission of the Licensor through PLSclear. 3 K. Link and K. Wendland, Tracing tangueros. © Oxford University Press 2016. Reproduced with permission of the Licensor through PLSclear. 4 This digitalized score was chosen for the sake of clarity. The manuscript was published in Salgán’s (2008) Arreglos para orquesta típica: tradición e innovación en manuscritos originales. 5 K. Link and K. Wendland, Tracing tangueros. © Oxford University Press 2016. Reproduced with permission of the Licensor through PLSclear. 6 As read in his full article, available at website Todo Tango, www.todotango.com/historias/cronica/317/Gran-Hotel-Victoria-Gran-Hotel-Victoria-un-tango-anonimo/ [Accessed 28 February 2014]. 7 A 1939 recording of Yunta brava by Juan D’Arienzo can be listened to online.

Horacio Salgán

111

8 Ángel Villoldo was a poet and musician (1861–1919), author of the famous tangos El choclo, La morocha, El porteñito and El esquinazo. He exquisitely transformed Spanish tanguillos, cuplés and habaneras into musical pieces from the River Plate area of Argentina and Uruguay. 9 For example, the San Telmo Lounge electronic tango version of Gran Hotel Victoria: http://tinyurl.com/y39hrr2s [Accessed 4 November 2018]. 10 Transcription of the score edited by George Alexander Macfarren, 1841 publication, London: Musical Antiquarian Society. Public Domain. Available from: http://tinyurl. com/yyn5n2n4 [Accessed 5 February 2019].

6

Astor Piazzolla – his life, musical style and ensembles and his contribution to instrumental tango music Bárbara Varassi Pega

Introduction Astor Piazzolla: bandoneonist, arranger, composer, orchestra and ensemble leader (1921–1992) Astor Piazzolla was born in Mar del Plata, Argentina, but raised in New York City, the United States, where his parents had moved in 1924. Thus, during his early years as a professional musician, he was always at a remove from the environment surrounding him: he was an alien for porteños [people from Buenos Aires] and an Argentine for Americans. Later in his life, that duality would result in the former thinking he made ‘weird music’ and Americans perceiving his music as tango. His childhood in certain rough neighbourhoods was also reflected in his pieces: ‘Violence plus this exciting thing about New York are in my music, in my life, my behaviour, my reactions’ (Piazzolla 2005, p. 41). Piazzolla studied music and bandoneon at the initiative of his father, a lover of tango. His first bandoneon teacher was Homero Paoloni, with whom he studied

Astor Piazzolla

113

during a brief period when his family had moved back to Mar del Plata. Some months later, back in New York, he took classes intermittently with different music tutors. At the age of twelve he worked for radio WMCE in New York, which broadcasted for the Latin Quarter, Spain and South America. He played boleros and music by Bach and Mozart on the bandoneon. From these early days on, Piazzolla felt a strong need to distinguish himself, excel and be situated at the forefront (Speratti 1969, p. 42), an aim he achieved later in life through his own music. When he was thirteen, he took up lessons with the Hungarian pianist Bela Wilda, a pupil of Sergei Rachmaninov. As Piazzolla himself stated, this was the first of two decisive encounters with music. Wilda was his neighbour, whose piano playing Piazzolla had heard from his backyard. Thus started his relationship with a musician unacquainted with the bandoneon and who therefore adapted the piano repertoire (including works by Bach and Chopin) to his student’s needs. It was during this period that Piazzolla encountered the legendary Carlos Gardel, who was in New York for work. Piazzolla had a walk-on part in Gardel’s 1935 movie El día que me quieras and accompanied him with his bandoneon on several occasions. During his adolescence, Piazzolla’s musical tastes were moulded by jazz. Jazz played an influential role throughout his life, his favourite musicians being: Cab Calloway, Gerry Mulligan (with whom he recorded the album Summit, known as Reunión Cumbre in Argentina), Stan Kenton, George Gershwin, Art Tatum, Oscar Peterson, Gary Burton (with whom he also recorded), Chick Corea, Stan Getz, Chet Baker, Gil Evans, Quincy Jones, Miles Davis and Dizzy Gillespie. In 1937, back in Mar del Plata, Piazzolla listened to the sextet of violinist Elvino Vardaro on the radio, his second great musical encounter and his first meaningful connection to tango. Vardaro (to whom he dedicated his tango Vardarito some years later) exerted a strong musical influence on Piazzolla during his entire career. According to journalist Alberto Speratti, Piazzolla’s idols were Laurenz, De Caro, Maffia, Vardaro and Troilo, who were precisely the innovators of the genre (Speratti 1969, p. 49). In this period, he studied bandoneon with Líbero Paoloni, and in 1938 he met bandoneonist Miguel Caló, who was on tour with his orchestra in Mar del Plata. After listening to Piazzolla, Caló invited him to join them in Buenos Aires, where Piazzolla made his debut the following year with Caló’s orchestra. During those years, Piazzolla also played in Francisco Lauro’s orchestra and met Hugo Baralis, a violinist of Aníbal Troilo’s ensemble. Baralis arranged for Piazzolla to audition before Troilo to cover the unexpected absence of one of his bandoneonists. By then, after having attended regularly the rehearsals of Troilo’s orchestra, Piazzolla had already learnt their repertoire by heart (Ibid., p. 52). Thus, at the age of eighteen, he started playing in the most important contemporary orchestra of that time in the city of Buenos Aires. Driven by his will to study and further develop himself, Piazzolla took up classes with composer Alberto Ginastera. Under Ginastera’s guidance, he studied orchestration, harmony, counterpoint and composition for six years, applying everything he learnt to his arrangements for Troilo’s orchestra. Piazzolla crafted his innovations by borrowing elements from the music he studied and loved: tango,

114 Astor Piazzolla Western art music and jazz. In Troilo’s orchestra he also met pianist Orlando Goñi and double bass player Kicho Díaz, who were later part of some of his own ensembles. During these years, as Piazzolla dreamt of being a concert musician, he started to write innovative arrangements of tangos such as Chiqué, Uno and Inspiración. In 1942, in addition to lessons with Ginastera, he studied piano, composition and harmony with Raúl Spivak. All his life Piazzolla kept returning to the piano to compose, rather than the bandoneon. In 1944 he abandoned Troilo’s orchestra and started a new ensemble with singer Francisco Fiorentino. Piazzolla recalls his experience with Troilo as follows: When I joined Troilo I tried to imitate many of his things. . . . I learned the tricks of the tangueros, those intuitive tricks that helped me later on. I couldn’t define them technically; they are forms of playing, forms of feeling; it’s something that comes from inside, spontaneously. At the outset I was just one of the bandoneons Troilo had in the orchestra, but I wanted to be number one, and I got there. El Gordo [Troilo] trusted me. (Azzi and Collier 2000, p. 31) Troilo trusted him, so much so that he asked him to take the role of lead bandoneon when he could not play, with Piazzolla even occasionally performing as a pianist when Orlando Goñi could not attend. Piazzolla was an extremely gifted bandoneonist, with a clear diction in articulated passages and virtuosic phrasing in melodic passages. His main influences, aside from Aníbal Troilo, were Pedro Laurenz and Pedro Maffia (to whom he dedicated Pedro y Pedro, 1981). Piazzolla himself confirmed the musical influence of Osvaldo Pugliese, Orlando Goñi, Alfredo Gobbi, Argentino Galván and Horacio Salgán on his own development (Speratti 1969, p. 62). In addition – as with both Pugliese and Salgán – Piazzolla also built upon the approach of the Julio and Francisco De Caro school. He claimed to have been influenced by the De Caro brothers regarding what he called ‘swing’, preserving the rhythmical aspect, the flavour, the beat, while advancing – through studies, intuition and hard work – the ‘rudimentary’ developments of the De Caro brothers (Ibid., p. 97). Piazzolla paid tribute to De Caro with his well-known piece Decarísimo. In 1946 Piazzolla formed the first orchestra of his own, side by side with bandoneonist Roberto Di Filippo, who significantly influenced his bandoneon style. The best musicians of the day went to listen to Piazzolla in the café where he performed with his orchestra. However, as he pointed out: ‘That orchestra was very modern for its time and because of this, it had little work. That I wouldn’t get calls from clubs to do dance dates was understandable’ (Gorín 2001, p. 45).1 Piazzolla earned his money during this period by writing arrangements for the most renowned contemporary ensembles: Troilo, Francini-Pontier, Basso, Fresedo and Osvaldo Pugliese, among others. Like Salgán, Piazzolla’s drive to make arrangements was born of the desire to make pieces sound the way he wanted them

Astor Piazzolla

115

to. In 1947 he began to compose music for Argentinian films and theatre plays. Later he would also compose for foreign films, mainly from Italy and France, an activity he continued to pursue throughout his life. In those years he wrote sonatas, suites and other forms in the classical tradition, including his Sinfonía de Buenos Aires for orchestra and two bandoneons that created a scandal at its premiere in 1953. As the available studies on Piazzolla’s music reveal (Speratti 1969, p. 132), his influences from Western art music included Béla Bartók, Igor Stravinsky and Paul Hindemith, which can be perceived in two of the pieces analyzed in this chapter (Tres minutos con la realidad and Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi). Piazzolla wanted to achieve what had been accomplished by Bartók and Villa-Lobos: to compose through drawing upon the music of his country. In 1954 he accepted a scholarship to study in Paris with Nadia Boulanger for a year. He studied composition, harmony and counterpoint under her tuition without confessing his tango background. When Boulanger listened to his piece Triunfal on the piano, she stated this was the authentic Piazzolla, the one she was interested in, asking him never to abandon his authentic voice (Piazzolla 2005, p. 156). These words marked out his path and helped him realize his true language. The set of tangos commonly known as ‘Parisian’ pieces (such as Chau París, Prepárense, Picasso, Imperial and Marrón y azul), which Piazzolla recorded before returning to Buenos Aires, date back to these months spent in Paris. In 1955, influenced by Gerry Mulligan’s octet, Piazzolla formed the Octeto Buenos Aires, where he included the electric guitar for the first time, recruiting jazz guitar player Horacio Malvicino: That was what I wanted: to break away from all the musical standards that prevailed in Argentina. I had done it in 1946, but timidly. My arrangements had a special jazz-like pulse, derived from cool and progressive jazz. They were complex, different. Let’s not forget that in those times I was already listening to Stan Kenton and Bill Evans. (Piazzolla 2005, p. 163) In the ‘Decalogue’, a written work that set out the objectives for his octet, Piazzolla enumerates his aim to revolutionize the tango world. The ‘Decalogue’ is exemplary of both Piazzolla’s new approach to tango music and his position as an artist: (1) To join together principally for artistic purposes, leaving the commercial side in second place. (2) To gradually withdraw from participation in other bands, so as to give the ensemble the greatest effectiveness. (3) To perform the tango as it is felt, eliminating all kinds of extraneous influences which can impinge on our fixed purposes. (4) Since this is an ensemble consisting of solo instrumentalists, each of whom has an outstanding music role, there is no director. A musical leadership is recognized: that of Astor Piazzolla.

116 Astor Piazzolla (5) The repertory will consist of contemporary works, works from the Guardia vieja, and new creations as they are produced. (6) In order to take fullest advantage of the musical resources of the tango, works that are sung will not be played, except on rare occasions. (7) Since the ensemble is only to be listened to by the public, it will not play at dances. In consequence, its performances will be limited to radio, television, recordings and theatre shows. (8) The use of instruments never before included in tango bands (electric guitar) and other effects (percussion), as well as the overall structure of the works with their modern trend, will be explained before each performance so as to facilitate an immediate understanding of them. (9) Since nothing is the fruit of improvisation, the scores will be written with the best musical improvement that can be attained within the genre, which will help it to be evaluated by the most demanding experts. (10) (a) To raise the quality of tango. (b) To convince those who have moved away from tango, and its detractors, of the unquestionable value of our music. (c) To attract those who exclusively love foreign music. (d) To conquer the mass public, a task we take for granted as arduous, but certain as soon as they have heard the themes played many times. (e) To take overseas, as an artistic embassy, this musical expression of the land where the tango originated, to demonstrate its evolution and to further justify the appreciation in which it is held. (Azzi and Collier 2000, pp. 58–59) In 1957 he worked and recorded with a string orchestra in Radio El Mundo. During those years he studied conducting with Hermann Scherchen and, in 1958, decided to try his luck in the United States, without success. There he formed a commercial quintet featuring electric guitar, vibraphone, piano and double bass. Years later he would confess this jazz-tango fusion was a ‘deadly sin’ (Speratti 1969, p. 77). In 1960 he settled again in Argentina, formed the string orchestra for Radio Splendid and participated on TV shows. In 1961 he started to work with his own quintet in the renowned Jamaica nightclub, where Salgán also played: at long last they were performing in this place where they could make music ‘to be listened to’. In this first quintet, musicians in the ensemble include Horacio Malvicino on electric guitar (then replaced by Oscar López Ruiz), Kicho Díaz on the double bass, Simón Bajour on violin (then replaced by Emilio Vardaro) and Jaime Gosis on piano. The quintet opened up a new path in the history of tango and for Piazzolla himself: In those days I started writing [composing, arranging] like crazy. I systematically included fugued themes, contrapuntal elements, the canyengue and milonga-related manner, in the Pugliese style. From then on, the quintet became a constant in my career . . . my favourite ensemble, the instrumental group with which I feel most comfortable. (Piazzolla 2005, p. 172)

Astor Piazzolla

117

In 1962 he played in nightspot Club 676 on a regular basis, strengthening his quintet and establishing his style in a definitive way. The best musicians visiting Buenos Aires went there to listen to him; his music was respected and known both domestically and abroad. His vision regarding a ‘music of interpreters’ and the ‘group of soloists’ was clearly defined: ‘Music was conceived based on performers to such an extent that pieces or whole sections were included or left out from repertoires depending on who were playing in the ensemble’ (Fischerman 2009, p. 296). In Piazzolla’s words: I’ve always written thinking of the musicians I have with me. But I also gave them the freedom to fly. I had pianists that improvised like gods: Osvaldo Tarantino, who came from tango; Pablo Ziegler, who was schooled in jazz; Gerardo Gandini, a scholar in contemporary music. In the Electronic Octet I had Juan Carlos Cirigliano, who was a big fan of Horacio Salgán. . . . That’s why I always called the best soloists: to enhance my music. The one thing I could never stand was that the essence might get lost. I wanted tango swing, not jazz swing or contemporary music swing. Piazzolla had to sound like Piazzolla. (Gorín 2001, p. 58)2 When work started to become scarce, the quintet toured the inland provinces, where some ensembles had already begun to imitate their style, a trend that continues up to the present day. In 1968, when Piazzolla dissolved the quintet, he wrote an operita called María de Buenos Aires jointly with writer and poet Horacio Ferrer, who is also the author of many of his sung tangos. Additionally, Piazzolla put to music, and recorded, texts written by Ernesto Sábato and Jorge Luis Borges, among others. In this operita, Piazzolla impressively synthesizes his musical background, although he keeps declaring himself to be a highly intuitive musician, even when referring to sections composed with great virtuosity, such as the fugue. Teodoro Fuchs marvelled at the fugue in the operita, which Piazzolla declared he had composed in one go by simply following his intuition, in contrast to the substantial effort that polyphonic composition would cost him when he was studying with Ginastera (Speratti 1969, pp. 99–100). Between 1971 and 1972 he focused on the nonet Conjunto 9. Regarding this ensemble, Piazzolla stated: ‘The Nonet was like a big dream, the chamber group I always wanted to have’ (Gorín 2001, p. 50).3 Between 1974 and 1978 he worked in Europe (mainly in Italy), where most of his production included large-scale bandoneon solos with instrumental accompaniment due to the collaborative work with session musicians who did not come from the world of tango (García Brunelli 1992, p. 215). In 1978 he founded his second quintet, which he would dissolve ten years later, in 1988. By then, Piazzolla was renowned worldwide and had successfully toured in Europe, the United States and Japan. During those years he again wrote many works related to Western art music: Concierto para bandoneón y orquesta, Suite Punta del Este, Tres tangos para bandoneón y orquesta, Concierto para bandoneón, guitarra y orquesta and Cinco sensaciones de tango.

118 Astor Piazzolla Piazzolla changed the standard way of playing the bandoneon, thus achieving different kinds of sonorities, by playing standing. According to bandoneonist Víctor Villena, the weight with which the two keyboards of the bandoneon fall to both sides when standing up greatly influences the resulting sound and the technique of playing.4 Piazzolla describes it as follows: For many years I played it [the bandoneon] sitting down, like most of my colleagues, until I became a soloist. Then I felt the need to look for a different position, more in tune with my personality. Sitting down I felt tied down. I stood up, nailed the left leg to the floor, and put the instrument over the right one. Since then I play with my guts over the fueye [bellow]. Sometimes I even think we dance together, the bandoneon and me. (Gorín 2001, p. 142)5 Piazzolla died in 1992, aware – unlike many artists in history – that he had revolutionized the music he devoted his life to. Analysis of works In order to distinguish the main characteristics of his language and the innovations he introduced to the world of tango, this chapter presents the analysis of four pieces composed by Piazzolla: • • • •

Milonga del ángel Tres minutos con la realidad Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi Adiós Nonino.

The most salient features found in these pieces that are typical of Piazzolla’s language (described in detail at the end of this chapter) are: his interest in creating music ‘to be listened to’, with a central and virtuosic role for the bandoneon, and the treatment of the ensemble as a group of soloists (with extended solos and even soloistic compositions for all instruments, including the double bass); the extended use of phrasing in melodies and countermelodies; the use of motives and asymmetrical sections; the expanded duration of pieces and sections made up of more phrases than in traditional tango; the use of processes to unify the formal structure and build momentum; the creation of melodic lines with a small number of materials that gain significance through their superb interpretation or the use of monothematic forms that are based only on repeated motives and ostinatos (in contrast to the more typical tango themes described in Chapter 2); the so-called mugre (filth) effect (playing a line with two simultaneous notes a minor second apart); the introduction of static sections or phrases (in which aspects that are usually varied in tango are instead kept unchanged); the use of musical quotations; numerous modulations (including foreign tonalities) and the use of extended tonality; the systematization of the 3–3–2 rhythm with successive or simultaneous variations;

Astor Piazzolla

119

the use of polyrhythm and the superimposition of equivalent meters (4/4 and 3–3– 2/8); the renewed use of typical marcatos and descending or repeating bass lines; the introduction of instruments alien to tango, such as drums, vibraphone or electric guitar; the systematization of the slow milonga rhythm; the broad use of effects in all instruments; original alternatives to the typical tango I-V-I ending; thematic generalization; the use of variation techniques inherited from certain forms of Western art music; the expanded use of counterpoint (even introducing fugues to the world of tango) and the interplay between background and foreground layers already seen in previous chapters. Piazzolla’s music shares a common trait with the work of the other musicians studied in this volume: keeping one parameter stable while other parameters are modified. His use and combination of orchestration and compositional techniques from the tango, jazz and Western art music traditions to shape his pieces and arrangements is an advance in relation to traditional tango music.

Milonga del ángel Music by Astor Piazzolla, 1965 Ed. Nr. 20052; ISMN: M-2015–0054–6. Tonos Musikverlags GmbH Copyright © by Warner/Chappell Music Argentina Reproduced by kind permission of Warner/Chappell Music Argentina and Tonos Musikverlags GmbH This analysis uses the previously mentioned edition and the version recorded by Quinteto Tango Nuevo on the album Live – Lugano 13 Ottobre 1983, 1992, for the record company Ermitage, Italy. Astor Piazzolla, bandoneon; Fernando Suárez Paz, violin; Pablo Ziegler, piano; Oscar López Ruiz, guitar and Héctor Console, double bass. Duration: 6′40″ Milonga del ángel presents many innovative features, the central one being the treatment of the milonga campera rhythm, which Piazzolla used not only for the accompaniment but also for some of the melodies. This rhythm – derived from Argentinian folklore – is also found in other pieces, such as the famous Milonga triste (1936) by Sebastián Piana, which Piazzolla himself recorded with his quintet (Nuestro tiempo, 1962) and in a bandoneon duo playing both parts (recorded in 1970, featured on the album Astor Piazzolla 1943–1982, 1982). In many tangos, the milonga campera rhythm is used in the accompaniment during slow sections. Retrato de Julio Ahumada by Leopoldo Federico, Orlando Goñi by Alfredo Gobbi in the version performed by Sexteto Mayor and Chumbicha by Ernesto Baffa, recorded by Troilo’s orchestra, all demonstrate this typical use. In addition, in Aquellos tangos camperos by the famous duo Salgán-De Lío this rhythm is presented in several variations, and in Encuentro by Gustavo Beytelmann (analyzed in Chapter 7), the milonga campera accompaniment is used to highlight the recapitulation of the main theme. Although Salgán claims to have been the first to use the milonga campera rhythm with an orquesta típica (Ursini 1993, p. 171),

120 Astor Piazzolla Piazzolla is the one who systematized its use in many pieces, such as Oblivion and Romance del diablo. In other cases, the same accompanimental patterns were used in the slow sections of rhythmical tangos. Piazzolla definitively integrated the milonga campera rhythm into tango with a new formula that combines and alternates between elements from the two traditional milongas: campera and ciudadana, despite their contrasting tempos and moods. From the milonga campera he took the slow tempo, the 3–3–2 meter, the melancholic character and the bordoneo (in this work, bordoneo means both the bass line as well as the arpeggiated harmony that completes the rhythmical base). From the milonga ciudadana he used the rhythmical pattern (albeit rewritten in 4/4 and accented on beats one and three) and the melodic profile of the bass line, while the harmonic part that completes the rhythmical base is presented in various ways that are also derived from the tradition. According to Gustavo Beytelmann, the relationship between Piazzolla and composer Alberto Ginastera may have influenced Piazzolla’s use of this vernacular rhythm. In any case, Milonga del ángel exemplifies the possibilities for transformation and stylization of tango rhythms in general and of milonga in particular. Figure 6.1 on the companion website shows the bass line (in B minor) according to the pattern introduced by Piazzolla (a) and the traditional patterns from which it is derived (b and c). The accents between parentheses illustrate the usual way of playing these patterns, even when those accents are not notated: it is an implicit feature of interpretation that tango musicians know well. a) Pattern systematized by Piazzolla. b) Typical pattern of milonga ciudadana (in 2/4). The position of the accent is meant to create a syncopation and destabilize the steady beat. c) Typical pattern of milonga campera (with half-step appoggiatura - ). The first pattern (a) is the one at the beginning of Milonga del ángel, based on the milonga ciudadana rhythm (b) but, as noted earlier, in a much slower tempo. Another important difference between patterns a) and b) is the pitch of their second note. Piazzolla simplifies the profile of the bass line by using only two pitches of the scale: (B) and (F♯), avoiding the use of (D) as would be typical in a milonga ciudadana. Piazzolla instead reserves this note for the melody, which is based on a repeating D. In other moments of the piece employing this rhythmical pattern, he uses the repetition of a single pitch as a pedal point. The displaced accent shows another strong discrepancy between patterns (a) and (b). Although they are based on a marcato in 2,6 in Piazzolla’s pattern the accent falls on the third beat. In contrast, with the milonga ciudadana pattern, the accent is usually played on the sixteenth note before the third beat in order to emphasize the syncopation, which is articulated by means of a tie,7 as shown in Figure 6.1. From pattern (c), Piazzolla took the slow tempo, the character and the typical half-step appoggiatura ( - in tonic harmony, - in dominant). The traditional patterns of the milonga rhythm will be studied in the following paragraphs on a case-by-case basis in relation to their use in Milonga del ángel.

Astor Piazzolla

121

The main themes in Milonga del ángel are generally played by the bandoneon (Figure 6.2 on the companion website). The centrality of the bandoneon in Piazzolla’s pieces could be compared to that of the piano in Salgán’s works. Indeed, Piazzolla takes the idea of a concertante instrumentalist role even further and becomes the unequivocal main soloist of his ensemble, which was not a common practice in traditional tango. The melodic lines in the piece consist of a few notes, usually played with the bandoneon’s right hand in a restricted tessitura. The striking beauty of this piece emerges from the musicians’ performance and the way in which Piazzolla and Suárez Paz phrase their solos. As part of their phrasing and in order to enhance expressivity, they often changed and improvised ornaments – as is traceable in the different versions of live and studio recordings of this piece or Adiós Nonino, for example.8 There is much use of glissandos and portamenti in the violin, which is part of the legacy of De Caro. As usual in tango, the bass maintains the steady beat, which allows the rest of the instruments to phrase freely. However, Console seems to play the first note of each bar strictly on the beat, while not always doing so with the other notes in the bar, adding somehow an extra flow to the upper layers of phrasing. In addition to the phrased solos, the accompanimental countermelodies are phrased as well, generating different overlapping phrasings, a core feature of this ‘ensemble of soloists’ (a notion already discussed in Chapter 5 on Salgán). In other ensembles, phrasing is used exclusively by the soloist or the instrumental section playing the theme (as in many orquestas típicas). Regarding the harmonic features in Milonga del ángel, modulations are also used in an innovative manner. There are many more modulations than is typical in tango, and they never move to parallel, relative or closely related tonalities. This is a technique to generate contrasts and compensate for the more static treatment of materials in other parameters. The first three tonalities of the piece – B minor, C minor and C♯ minor – also establish an ascending motion that compensates for the insistent, descending motion of the theme (D, C♯, B). This technique of creating contrary motion between the theme’s profile and the sequence of tonalities is also found in the previously mentioned piece Encuentro by Gustavo Beytelmann. Another main trait of Piazzolla’s style is the increased number of phrases and sections as well as the extended duration of the solos. This results in a piece that lasts 6′40″, more than twice the length of a standard tango. Figure 6.2 on the companion website shows the formal scheme of the piece and its main characteristics. Introduction (from bar 1 to bar 12), [00:00–00:40] The innovative features of the piece are demonstrated from the first bar. As mentioned earlier, the bass plays pattern a), shown in Figure 6.1 on the companion website, which remains unchanged for sixteen bars (the entire introduction and the first four bars of section A), thus blurring the formal segmentation. The bass line also contrasts with the typical construction of this pattern, which usually alternates

122 Astor Piazzolla between tonic and dominant harmonies with structures such as the ones shown in Figure 6.3 on the companion website, rather than staying only in the tonic as happens in Milonga del ángel. Over this rhythmical bass line, Piazzolla introduces the typical two-hands piano solo, in this case two octaves apart and with unusual rhythmical and melodic features. Piazzolla derives the main line’s melodic profile from the milonga bass line – Figure 6.1 patterns a) and c) and Figure 6.3 second pattern (both on the companion website) – and states the melody using repeated whole notes that are ornamented with acciaccaturas. The resulting melody is more typical of the bandoneon than of the piano. Figure 6.4 on the companion website shows the milonga bass line on the first staff and, below, the pitches derived from it, which create the piano melody in the introduction. The melancholic mood which is so characteristic for the milonga campera is reinforced by the unchanging instrumentation and p dynamics as well as by the static nature of all of the textural layers (including the harmonic background played by the electric guitar and violin and the ostinato bass line). This introduction consists of an eight-bar theme, followed by a four-bar extension that is a rhythmical augmentation of the first two bars (indicated in Figure 6.4 on the companion website). In the extension (bars 9–12) the guitar begins the syncopated countermelody of section A, softening the transition. Like the melodic line in the piano part, the guitar countermelody is also derived from the milonga campera’s bordoneo. Figure 6.5 on the companion website shows one of the traditional patterns of milonga campera with a harmonic accompaniment featuring bordoneo. Figure 6.6 on the companion website shows this pattern as re-created by Piazzolla for the guitar countermelody. The timbre of the electric guitar constituted another innovation in the tango world. In some sections of this piece its use could be related to the role given to the amplified guitar in Salgán’s quintet: providing harmonic fills and countermelodies that contrast rhythmically and accentually with the rhythmical base. In Piazzolla’s compositions, however, in general, the instrument either performs soloistically (as in El entrerriano, analyzed later in this volume, or the counterpoint passages in Primavera Porteña and Invierno Porteño) or – most frequently – in unison with (or as part of) the countermelody or rhythmical base (as in Adiós Nonino and Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi, analyzed in this chapter). Finally, sections A and B are divided into regular eight-bar phrases to which two bars are systematically added (indicated in Figure 6.2 on the companion website as 8 + 2) when they precede a new tonality. Sections are longer, as they have more phrases than is usual in a traditional tango. Yet Piazzolla’s creation of themes in these phrases does not differ significantly from a construction using regular motives and phrases, typical of traditional tango. Section A (from bar 13 to bar 28), [00:40–01:33] The theme of section A is presented in a long bandoneon solo encompassing four consecutive phrases in antecedent-consequent pairs (a1, a2 and a1′, a2′). This is

Astor Piazzolla

123

quite unusual in the language of tango, which, as noted in previous chapters, is based on frequent contrasts in instrumentation, rhythm, articulation and character. In the examples presented here, the difference between the score and Piazzolla’s performance is striking. As is usual in the phrased solos, the long notes of the melody – written on the downbeat – are rarely aligned with the first beat of each bar in performance, while the ornamentation used differs from the score as well as from recording to recording. Piazzolla establishes this performative technique from the very first note of the theme, by entering a bar earlier than in the score with pp dynamics and, by means of a crescendo, coming to the foreground in the next bar (bar 13) and establishing his soloistic role. a1 (from bar 13 to bar 20), [00:40–01:06] The main theme encompasses two phrases (a1 and a2, Figure 6.7 on the companion website). The first phrase, a1, is structured as follows: •

•

First semi-phrase (bars 13–16): Piazzolla plays three consecutive one-bar motives on (D), each time with a changing upbeat figure based on the traditional half-step lower neighbour and ornaments using - - ; the semi-phrase concludes on . Second semi-phrase (bars 17–20): the same motive is presented a minor third lower while the piece briefly modulates to the relative tonality D major. In bar 19 the direction of the line is inverted and the rhythm is retrograded, though it again concludes on . a2 (from bar 21 to bar 28), [01:06–01:33]

The first two bars (bars 21–22) in this second phrase could be derived from the milonga campera’s bass line (indicated with ovals in Figure 6.7 on the companion website). Following these are variations of the one-bar motive, again on (D) as in a1, though now with several ornaments using - . This section ends with another variation of the initial bordoneo. The accompaniment presents diverse bordoneos on the guitar – maintaining the original connection between the instrument and the milonga campera rhythm – while the violin plays a lyrical countermelody of long notes featuring a mainly descending stepwise motion, as in the theme. The absence of the piano in most of this first section contributes to its intimate character. Another relevant feature of the accompaniment is the polyrhythm in bars 27–28, used as a contrasting element to demarcate the end of section A and as a connecting passage to A′. As indicated in Figure 6.8 on the companion website, three different rhythmical patterns are superimposed, creating a polyrhythm: 1) 3+3+3+3+3: this is a variation of the 3–3–2 rhythm. In this case, even though accents are not written out, they are always played on the first eighth note of every group of 3. This two-bar motive in which the rhythmical structure

124 Astor Piazzolla remains unaligned with the meter is used frequently in Piazzolla’s music, as we will see in other analyses in this chapter. 2) In 2 (half notes), emphasizing accentuation in the bass line. 3) Milonga rhythm. This is the first time the piano plays in section A, which further reinforces the entrance of section A′ while creating a rhythmical and accentual contrast with the bass line. As with the connection made by the guitar between the introduction and the beginning of section A, the entrance of the piano in the last two bars of this section structures formal segmentation in a similar way. Section A′ (from bar 29 to bar 44), [01:33–02:22] The separation from section A is emphasized by means of a homorhythmical accompaniment in the first four bars of section A′, which contrast with the polyrhythm of the previous segment. These four bars (and their reoccurrence in bars 105–106) present another variation of the milonga ciudadana rhythm. Figure 6.9 exemplifies the traditional rhythmical pattern, and Figure 6.10 (both on the companion website) shows the pattern that Piazzolla derived from it, taking only the upper line of Figure 6.9 and displacing the accent to eighth notes 4 and 8 of each bar. In section A′ the phrases of section A are restated with slight variations, while the rhythmical base plays diverse new patterns based on the slow milonga (Figure 6.11 on the companion website). a1′ (from bar 29 to bar 36), [01:33–01:56]: this phrase has a slightly faster tempo, a more articulated accompaniment and an increase in dynamics, tessitura and instrumental density. The bandoneon emphasizes the ornaments of the theme, and the violin plays the countermelody of the previous section, now three octaves higher and with variations. a2′ (from bar 37 to bar 44), [01:56–02:22]: the initial tempo resumes, and a2 is recapitulated with some variations. Bridge (from bar 45 to bar 54), [02:22–02:54] In order to create and emphasize the typical formal contrast, Piazzolla places a bridge between sections A and B. Although the bridge maintains the tempo and character of the previous sections, it is distinctive because it presents the most typical pattern of milonga campera in two complementary textural layers (Figure 6.12 on the companion website): in one layer, the double bass and the electric guitar perform the bass motive in unison; in the other, the piano, the violin and the bandoneon left hand (in the only segment that uses the low register) play the accompanimental bordoneo that completes the harmony while creating a new melody. In this way, Piazzolla orchestrates the original guitar pattern of milonga campera (Figure 6.13, variation of the pattern in Figure 6.5, both on the companion website). In the absence of a theme, this accompanimental bordoneo is perceived

Astor Piazzolla

125

as the main textural layer – yet another innovation – and thus is perceived in a manner that contrasts its original role of accompanying verses and melodies. This use of accompanimental motives and ostinatos as a main textural layer is another feature of Piazzolla’s music. Finally, the formal structure of the bridge, featuring five repetitions of its main motive, represents another contrast with the previous phrases. This motive is used in two-bar ostinatos that move through various transpositions in order to modulate to C minor, the tonality of section B. Section B (from bar 55 to bar 72), [02:54–03:56] As the bridge ends, a phrased solo in the violin begins, structured in two phrases (antecedent-consequent): b1 and b2 (Figure 6.14 on the companion website). b1 (from bar 55 to bar 62), [02:54–03:22]: this phrase is based on a two-bar motive that repeats with slight variations over three successively descending octaves. It is made up of materials similar to those of the bandoneon solo in section A, including neighbour tones, seconds and thirds, and the prevailing descending motion. The final segment (indicated in Figure 6.14 with a dashed line) functions as a connecting passage that fills the registral gap and leads to the second phrase, b2. b2 (from bar 63 to bar 72), [03:22–03:56]: in this phrase the violin continues the melody while the bandoneon stops playing in order to later highlight the return of theme A in the following section. The accompaniment continues the slow milonga rhythm, presented again in a variety of combinations. This phrase concludes with the typical ascending sixths of the milonga bordoneo (as seen in Figures 6.1, 6.3, 6.5, 6.7 and 6.12 on the companion website), here featuring unusual attacks on the downbeat (Figure. 6.14 on the companion website). Suárez Paz adds glissandos as part of the phrasing used to state the theme, contributing to the overall lyricism of the piece. These glissandos are frequently used in the phrased violin melodies in Piazzolla’s pieces and are also derived from the tango tradition and the De Caro school. In addition to the already-exemplified patterns, new combinations are found in section B (shown in Figure 6.15 on the companion website). Section A″ (from bar 73 to bar 96), [03:56–05:22] This section functions as a recapitulation of section A, though now in a new tonality (C♯ minor) and lasting three phrases rather than two. The bandoneon again plays the theme (a1″, bars 73–79), [03:56–04:24] with slight variations in phrasing and ornamentation, compared to a1. The orchestration in this phrase presents an interesting feature, again aimed at smoothly connecting sections, in this case B and A″ (Figure 6.16 on the companion website). Piazzolla, who does not play in the previous phrase, enters with the new theme two bars before this section. Thus, the last note of the violin solo in the previous segment (E♭, of C minor) aligns with the first note of the bandoneon, which leads to the first note of the theme in A″ (E, of C♯ minor). The piano is again absent (as in A), and the guitar phrases its

126 Astor Piazzolla bordoneos more than in the preceding sections. The phrase a2″ (bars 80–89), [04:24–04:51] starts as in a2, but then modifies the melodic profile to lead to a3 (bars 90–96), [04:51–05:22], which forms an extension of the theme that emphasizes and demarcates the following presentation of section A, A‴. Section A‴ (from bar 97 to bar 109), [05:22–06:01] This section presents another unusual modulation, now from C♯ minor to F minor, and is separated from the previous section by the interruption of the rhythmical base in bar 96 (the last of A″). It presents a final variation of a1 and a2. a1‴ (from bar 97 to bar 104), [05:22–05:45]: in order to highlight the final occurrence of the bandoneon’s theme (again varied in phrasing and ornamentation), registral, textural and dynamic aspects are altered (Figure 6.17 on the companion website). The bandoneon uses its high register (here starting the phrase on an A5), and the violin plays harmonics, using its highest register. The rhythmical base is reinforced by typical tango arrastres in all of the bars (which is not the typical use in traditional tango), thickened by parallel fifths in the piano. This sort of heavy, thickened accompanimental base could be related to Pugliese’s yumba. The piano and guitar chords fill the registral gap between the high register (bandoneon and violin) and the low register (arrastres). Here, the moment of the widest tessitura and greatest registral density of the piece has been reached, further emphasized by f dynamics. The last bars feature a rubato arrebatado that leads to a2‴. a2‴ (from bar 105 to bar 109, Figure 6.18 on the companion website), [05:45– 06:01]: this phrase is heavily varied and compressed in relation to a2. It has five bars instead of eight, which are divided into two brief segments of contrasting accompaniment. The first segment features a faster tempo, while the latter returns to the general slow tempo of the piece. The rhythmical patterns used derive from parts of the milonga rhythm. In Figure 6.18 on the companion website, a rectangle in the first staff indicated with the letter a) shows the rhythm already seen in a′ (section A′) from which Piazzolla crafted the model indicated with the letter c) in the quintet’s score below (same figure). The descending motion of the bass (indicated with descending arrows) also comes from pattern a) in Figure 6.18. The rhythms in bars 107–108 would be derived from pattern b): its first half is repeated to generate bar 107 (indicated by a rectangle with dashed lines), and its second half is augmented to generate bar 108 (indicated with ovals). Coda (from bar 110 to bar 113), [06:01–06:40] The bandoneon links A‴ to the Coda by means of a connecting passage that is not written out in the score but is heard on the recording. The guitar plays ascending arpeggios that are typical of the bordoneo in a slow milonga – though here played on the downbeat – while the rest of the instruments play a marcato in 2 half notes to emphasize the laid-back rubato that leads to the end of the piece (Figure 6.19 on the companion website).

Astor Piazzolla

127

Tres minutos con la realidad Music and arrangement by Astor Piazzolla, 1957 Copyright © by Warner/Chappell Music Argentina Reproduced by kind permission of Warner/Chappell Music Argentina Recorded on the album Tango en Hi-Fi in 1957 for the record company Music Hall, Argentina. Astor Piazzolla, bandoneon; Elvino Vardaro, violin; Jaime Gosis, piano; José Bragato, violoncello; Juan Vasallo, double bass; and strings Duration: 3′03″ The title of Tres minutos con la realidad refers to the three-minute average duration of a traditional tango. In this piece, Piazzolla maintains some characteristics of traditional tango – the A-B-A′-Coda form and the typical contrast between sections – while asserting some features of his own language, such as the use of ostinatos and the marcato in 3–3–2. According to Azzi, Piazzolla himself described the piece as ‘a toccata in tango rhythm’ and continues: He composed it in about four hours, just after hearing Bartók’s Second Violin Concerto for the first time. The piece is marked by distinctly Bartokian effects, as well as rhythmic accents reminiscent of Stravinsky’s Rite of Spring. Jaime Gosis’s extraordinary piano solo is a feature that stands out in the recording. (Azzi and Collier 2000, p. 63) In her essay ‘La poética referencial de Astor Piazzolla’ (2008, p. 57), musicologist Malena Kuss states that the most innovative aspect of this tango is the use of the octatonic scale in section A, which renders the piece tonally ambiguous, a concept alien to the tango tradition.9 The frequent use of minor thirds in the ostinato as well as its transpositions (E, G, B♭) may derive from the octatonic scale. In Kuss’s opinion, the whole-tone scale, which could be derived from the bass line in Tres minutos con la realidad, may also be related to the octatonic scale due to the large number of tritones present in both scales (octatonic and whole-tone). However, the harmony of this section could also be considered the superimposition of minor tetrachords and altered chords. Through these nontraditional scales, Piazzolla creates a new structure for the typically diatonic tango bass line. The analysis of Tres minutos con la realidad is based on the 1957 recording and on the transcription of the score10 copied by hand as usual by José Bragato,11 a copy of which was kindly sent to me by Omar García Brunelli (Instituto Nacional de Musicología, Buenos Aires, Argentina). The piece is organized into phrases that are usually regular, eight bars long, and divisible into two semi-phrases, thus maintaining the basic formal structure of traditional tango. However, sections are unusually long as they contain more than the two phrases typically found in standard tangos. Figure 6.20 shows the formal scheme of the piece and some of its main features.

128 Astor Piazzolla

Figure 6.20 Formal scheme of Tres minutos con la realidad

Section A (from bar 1 to bar 52), [00:00–01:30] This first section is longer than usual for a tango and considerably longer than the following section B. Although the typical contrast between sections A and B is maintained, this level of disproportion between their durations is unusual in traditional tango. It contains six phrases that are divided into two groups, each of them three phrases long. Tres minutos con la realidad could be considered a rhythmical tango with a brief contrasting section in the middle that prevents monotony and highlights the outer sections. a1 (from bar 1 to bar 8), [00:00–00:14]: in this phrase Piazzolla presents the motives of both the theme and the bass, which he will use in all the subsequent phrases, through variation and transposition techniques. According to Andrea Marsili (2014, pp. 171– 172), throughout section A the theme is varied as follows (Figure 6.21). The two-bar thematic motive of the first semi-phrase (beginning with an E, bars 1–4, Figure 6.22) is built from a minor third and features the half-step appoggiaturas and stepwise motion typical of tango melodies, with a 3–3–2 rhythm in the first bar and a syncopated rhythm in the second, followed by accents aligning with the beat. The rhythmical and accentual pattern of the main textural layer in a1 (bandoneon and strings) is reinforced by the harmonic accompaniment (chords in the right hand of the piano). The two-bar motive in the bass line (double bass and left hand of the piano) presents a marcato in 412 with typical tango ornaments, contrasting with the rhythm in the main textural layer.13 This technique is characteristic of Piazzolla’s works: the bass line contains four beats per measure, strongly expressing the meter and contrasting with the 3–3–2 pattern. According to musicologist Edgardo Rodríguez (2005), the systematic use of this superimposition of equivalent meters (4/4 and 3–3–2/8) is one of the major contributions of Piazzolla’s compositional technique (Figure 6.22).

Astor Piazzolla

129

Figure 6.21 Variations on the opening two-bar motive according to Marsili (2014), bars 1–52 [00:00–01:30]

130 Astor Piazzolla

Figure 6.22 Beginning of a1, bars 1–2 [00:00–00:04]

Astor Piazzolla

131

In the second semi-phrase (bars 5–8) of a1 all of the textural layers are transposed a minor third higher, and the motive begins with a G (Figure 6.23). a2 (from bar 9 to bar 16), [00:14–00:28]: this phrase is divided into three fragments of 3, 3, and 2 bars in length, which is an instance of Piazzolla’s famous 3–3–2 rhythm being employed at the formal level. In the first fragment (bars 9–11) there is a last transposition, again a minor third higher, with the motive thus

Figure 6.23 Beginning of the second semi-phrase of a1, bars 5–6 [00:07–00:11]

132 Astor Piazzolla beginning on a B♭. It is also slightly varied: the first eighth note is subdivided into four thirty-second notes, and the left hand of the bandoneon joins in to reinforce the piano chords (Figure 6.24). Thus ends a gradual process that connects the three transpositions of the motive through an increase in both instrumental density (as the left hand of the piano joins in bar 9) and dynamics (with a p–mf–f crescendo, respectively) as well as through the expansion of the tessitura (the last transposition creates the greatest registral distance between the melody and the bass). The second fragment of a2 (bars 12–14) generates contrast through a rapid solo of the bandoneon (Figure 6.25). The contrast is further emphasized by the homorhythmic

Figure 6.24 Beginning of a2, bars 9–10 [00:14–00:18]

Figure 6.25 End of a2 and beginning of a3, bars 12–17 [00:19–00:30]

Astor Piazzolla 133

134 Astor Piazzolla accompaniment in the rest of the instruments, even including the bass, which abandons its marcato in 4. The use of this kind of homorhythmic accompaniment is another salient feature of Piazzolla’s music. It consists of a brief ostinato (in this case a sixteenth rest and a sixteenth note followed by an eighth note) that is repeated independently from the 4/4 meter until it has filled a number of whole bars, most often two (bars 12–13 in Figure 6.25). Thus, two kinds of ‘deviations’ are presented: • •

Thematic: the bandoneon solo presents the necessary contrast, allowing for the return of the ostinato in the following phrase. Metrical and accentual: bars 12–13 are perceived as a compound 6/8 meter that momentarily blurs the 4/4 meter and its simple subdivision. This procedure is used again later in this piece and also in other pieces by Piazzolla (including Michelangelo 70, Resurrección del ángel, Escualo and Revirado), where it is indeed written out with the sequence of meters 4/4–6/8.

In bar 14 materials from phrases a1 and a2 appear in combination (Figure 6.25). The third and final fragment of a2 (bars 15–16, Figure 6.25), in which materials of the following phrase are already introduced, signals this change of phrase through a reduction to p dynamics and with a double bass line that contrasts, again, the main textural layer played in rhythmical unison by all of the other instruments. a3 (from bar 17 to bar 25), [00:28–00:43]: the beginning of this phrase is distinguished by the rhythmical base resuming the marcato in 4 with its superimposed chords in 3–3–2 (Figure 6.25), while the main textural layer continues with the motive started in bar 15, beginning with a C and, later, with a D. Considering the transpositions of the ostinato since the beginning of the piece, the resulting sequence is now E, G, B♭, C and D. This completes a cycle of transpositions containing the previously mentioned interval of a minor third as well as the whole tones of the bass line in contrary (now ascending) motion. The motives in a3 are no longer organized into two-bar segments as in the previous phrases, and here the bass alternates between a marcato in 4 and passages in free rhythm. Phrase a3 ends with the first full tutti of the piece, creating intense contrast. In addition, a 2/8 bar is added at the end (bar 25) in which a descending glissando creates a stronger segmentation than that of previous phrases. This divides section A into two large blocks of three phrases each, the first consisting of a1, a2 and a3 and the second of a4, a5 and a6. The ternary structure of these two blocks diverges from the more traditional binary construction in tango. a4 (bars 26–33), [00:43–00:56], a5 (bars 34–41), [00:56–01:11] and a6 (bars 42–52), [01:11–01:30]: in these phrases the materials of a1, a2 and a3 are varied. They are more discontinuous, as the motives are no longer organized into regular segments, and they feature frequent contrasts in instrumentation and register. In the first two sub-sections (a4 and a5), the bass line contributes to this feeling of discontinuity by freely moving between a marcato in 4, marcato in 3–3–2 and a variety of syncopated rhythms that sometimes join the main textural layer. The last phrase (a6, bars 42–52) has a number of characteristics that emphasize the end of section A. The piano plays a solo of percussive chords in the style of Bartók14 – very unusual in the world of tango – while the double bass accompanies with a marcato in 4 and the remaining instruments perform the ostinato motive in unison, in the medium-low register (Figure 6.26). Three transitional bars are then added

Astor Piazzolla

135

Figure 6.26 Beginning of a6, bars 42–43 [01:11–01:14]

(bars 50–52) to create a larger formal division between sections A and B. The piano solo concludes in the first of these three added bars, and in the remaining two bars the passage from bars 12–13 (perceived in 6/8) returns in a full tutti. The two main divisions of section A (between a3 and a4 and between A and B) are thus realized through a formal extension of one and three bars, respectively (Figure 6.20), a technique already seen in the chapter on Pugliese and Salgán. Section B (from bar 53 to bar 67), [01:30–01:57] Section B consists of two phrases (b1 and b2) that are regular and similar and that present the typical contrast with section A by means of a lyrical theme in the strings.

136 Astor Piazzolla Its tonal structure is based on an accompaniment that moves through the circle of fifths and is perceived immediately as contrasting to the initial use of harmony. This section links strongly to the language of tango. Throughout section B the phrases are in well-defined tonalities (C minor in b1 and F minor in b2). The main modulations of Tres minutos con la realidad are traditional and progress through the circle of fifths: G-octatonic for section A, to C minor in b1 and, finally, to F minor in b2. In section B, despite its distinctive, more melodic character, elements of section A, such as the tempo, are maintained. b1 (from bar 53 to bar 60), [01:30–01:44]: in this phrase the bass line in 4 and the ostinatos from section A continue. Here the ostinato motive is again varied but remains based on the interval of a minor third, yet without the appoggiaturas (Figure 6.27). The

Figure 6.27 Beginning of b1, bars 53–55 [01:30–01:35]

Astor Piazzolla

137

left hand of the bandoneon again plays a rapid passage, which functions this time, however, as a countermelody (combining the chromaticism of bars 37 and 50 with diatonic passages). Due to the superimposition of the string section theme and the bandoneon line, this phrase is perceived as having a polyphonic texture. b2 (from bar 61 to bar 67), [01:44–01:57], (Figure 6.28): the bandoneon joins the theme of the string section, while the accompanying marcato changes to 3–3–2,

Figure 6.28 Beginning of b2, bars 61–62 [01:44–01:48]

138 Astor Piazzolla and only the right hand of the piano maintains the ostinatos from the previous phrases. In b2, the main textural layer (bandoneon and strings) becomes more prominent and returns to the typical texture of melody and accompaniment. To summarize, in section B the main materials of section A are maintained and reorganized. The ostinatos in section B – orchestrated thinly – function as an accompanimental countermelody rather than as the main textural layer, as in section A. This again demonstrates the exchange between background and foreground layers, already commented upon in previous analyses in this book. The greatest difference between sections is, thus, the new melody. This same technique occurs in other pieces by Piazzolla, such as Fracanapa (1963), where the contrasting section is achieved by superimposing a phrased violin solo over a ceaseless ostinato. In Tres minutos con la realidad, the added theme seems to be completely new. However, a more careful listening reveals that the string line is derived from the ostinato motive in section A. The first bars of the B theme15 were most likely formed through a variation on the second half of the initial ostinato motive (although with a major third) and the inversion of some of its intervals (Figure 6.29). Finally, the theme alternates between major and minor thirds, both present in the two systems of pitch organization used in this piece (octatonic and tonal), which creates a sense of coherence. Lastly, sections A and B together form eight phrases that are divided into three groups: 3–3–2. Thus, Piazzolla applied the rhythmical structure of his most characteristic marcato not only to melodic lines but even to the formal organization of this piece at both the phrase (a2) and the section level (A: a1, a2, a3 + a4, a5, a6 and B: b1, b2). This also demonstrates a deviation from the binary structures used in traditional tango, such as: simple meter, two semi-phrases within a phrase, two phrases within a section and two sections within a piece. Section A′ (from bar 68 to bar 98), [01:57–02:49] Section A′ is organized into four phrases – three are eight bars in length (piano solo) and one is six bars in length – in which materials of section A are varied. This recapitulation expands upon the two-hands piano solo in octaves, typical of tango, transforming it into a virtuoso solo that is unusual for the genre. It is based on fast rhythms and utilizes the scales, arpeggios and chords in the Bartók style already heard in previous phrases. The length of the solo is also atypical and,

Figure 6.29 Thematic relations between section A (bars 1–2) and section B (bars 53–56)

Astor Piazzolla

139

although fully notated, it is stylistically more linked to improvised piano solos in jazz music. The last phrase of section A′ (a10, bars 93–98), [02:40–02:49] leads to the end of the piece, displaying an alternation between the ostinatos and bars in a 2/8 meter and featuring descending glissandos on the piano (the same technique used to divide a3 from a4). Coda (from bar 99 to bar 105), [02:49–03:03] The Coda (Figure 6.30) presents all of the materials and techniques used in the piece: a passage of ascending perfect fourths performed full tutti, followed by the sixteenthrest and note plus-eighth-note figure, and a descending glissando in the next bar. The accompaniment in the double bass and the guitar again imply a 6/8 meter that contrasts with the written 4/4. Finally, the piano resumes with materials derived from the preceding solo and leads to the final descending glissando, an ending used by Piazzolla in many of his pieces (for example Revirado, Decarísimo and La muerte del ángel). This represents yet another deviation from the traditional tango ending (I-V-I on beats one, two and three, respectively, in the last bar of the piece).

Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi Music and arrangement by Astor Piazzolla, 1967 Copyright © by Warner/Chappell Music Argentina Reproduced by kind permission of Warner/Chappell Music Argentina First recorded on Astor Piazzolla y su quinteto, 1967, for the record company Polydor, Uruguay. In this analysis I use the live version recorded in theatre Regina, Buenos Aires, on the LP Piazzolla en el Regina, 1970, for the record company RCAVictor, Argentina. Astor Piazzolla, bandoneon; Osvaldo Manzi, piano; Antonio Agri, violin; Kicho Díaz, double bass and Cacho Tirao, guitar Duration: 7′24″ Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi is a tribute to the violinist and composer Alfredo Gobbi (1912–1965), whose style inspired many of the best performers and composers of tango: Salgán, Pugliese, Troilo and Piazzolla himself. Piazzolla remembers Gobbi as follows: He would play the piano with three fingers and beautiful things would come out, like a little waltz he had dedicated to me. Once Alfredo came to my house. I wasn’t in, so he left the score for that waltz under my door. It was written in an elementary way, in pencil. When I started studying those scribblings I thought, what a beauty. I would like to write like this man. The tragedy is that I lost that page. I will never forgive myself. Soon after, he died. So I wrote a piece as a tribute: “Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi.” (Gorín 2001, pp. 99–100)16 In Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi, Piazzolla’s past and present coexist through both stylistic and literal quotes that evoke an older tango style in a clear attempt to make

Figure 6.30 Coda, bars 99–105 [02:49–03:03]

140 Astor Piazzolla

Astor Piazzolla

141

the piece resemble the musical output of Alfredo Gobbi. This technique is derived from certain forms of Western art music rather than tango. Piazzolla affirms this compositional strategy of stylistic quotes in an interview on the TV show Sábados de Tango, hosted by Miguel Ángel Manzi in 1973, by declaring the link between Gobbi and Agri is emphasized with the latter performing the two solos in Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi in a sort of imitation of the sound and style of Alfredo Gobbi.17 Many passages feature reminiscences of techniques and gestures – known as yeites18 – in the Gobbi style, found in Gobbi’s most famous tangos: Orlando Goñi (1950), Camandulaje (1954), Redención (1958–196019) and El andariego (1951), the latter analyzed in the chapter on Pugliese and explicitly quoted in Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi. Orlando Goñi is, in turn, a tribute by Gobbi to the brilliant pianist Orlando Goñi, who was also a major influence on Piazzolla during his years as a musician in Aníbal Troilo’s orchestra. Diana Piazzolla quotes Piazzolla as saying: ‘Goñi drove me crazy. Already when I was playing in Pichuco [Troilo]’s orchestra, I would sit behind him with a notebook and write down everything he played so I could imitate it later on the bandoneon’ (Piazzolla 2005, p. 115). Thus, in Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi, Piazzolla highlights features of both Gobbi’s and Goñi’s music that he incorporated into his own writing, establishing them as distinctive features of his style. From Gobbi, Piazzolla took the lyrical and phrased violin solos – with their intense vibrato, portamento and expressive ornaments – later transferring them to his bandoneon language. He also took certain syncopated rhythms and the metric pattern 3–3–2, which Gobbi may have inherited from Julio De Caro’s orchestra (Mauriño 2008, p. 21). From Goñi, he took the technique of ornamenting the structural notes of the solos with several grace notes (which the pianist played in the lower registers) and the use of the 3–3–2 pattern with octave leaps, sometimes ornamented with a half-step acciaccatura (Figure 6.31 on the companion website). Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi presents two contrasting sections in the traditional manner: a rhythmical A and a melodic B. Based on their main features, in this analysis the phrases will be classified as either melodic or rhythmical. These two types of phrases are primarily presented in contrasting blocks, sometimes intertwined and sometimes begun abruptly. The rhythmical phrases are characterized by the following: two-bar ostinato motives organized in regular phrases (in general, the traditional eight-bar phrases are maintained), instrumentation in homorhythmical or superimposed blocks, increased tempos and virtuosic passages. These two-bar rhythmical ostinatos – transposed to different pitches without modulation or any evident theme – are characteristic of Piazzolla’s music. The systematization of this device can be observed throughout many of his compositions, some of which are almost monothematic due to the omnipresence of an ostinato. Examples of this are Tres minutos con la realidad (also analyzed in this chapter), Tanguedia, Fracanapa and Golazo. Such linear treatment of musical materials was introduced by Osvaldo Pugliese in compositions like Negracha (analyzed in Chapter 4 on Pugliese), La yumba and Malandraca, whose model Piazzolla adopted and developed further. The melodic phrases – some of them evoking Gobbi’s language – are characterized by a slower tempo, the occurrence of extended phrased solos (mainly on the

142 Astor Piazzolla violin, paying tribute to Gobbi) and irregular phrases, often longer than the usual eight bars. Taking into account Gobbi’s well-deserved nickname, ‘the romantic violin of tango’, and the fact that Piazzolla represents a kind of explosive tango20 with his rhythmical and interpretative power, the clear distinction between rhythmical and melodic sections seems only natural. Thus, the typical contrast is maintained and made figurative by the addition of both real and symbolic dialogues: between sections, between ensemble and solo passages, between past and present, and between rhythmical and lyrical languages. The analysis that follows is based on the previously mentioned recording and its transcription, made by pianist and bandoneonist Claudio Constantini and shared with me for this work (reproduced here by his kind permission). The formal scheme in Figure 6.32 on the companion website shows the structure of the piece and the diverse tonalities used (indicated by ‘Ton.’). As in many pieces by Piazzolla, the number of modulations is larger than usual and includes many foreign tonalities. At the end of this piece, Piazzolla uses the same ascending chromatic progression in the modulations as in Milonga del ángel: B minor, C minor, and C♯ minor (bars 121–170). Section A (from bar 1 to bar 51), [00:00–02:02] This first section comprises six phrases: five of them are rhythmical (a1, a2, a3, a4 and a6) and one is melodic (a5), foreshadowing the evocative features of section B. In the first rhythmical segment (a1, a2, a3 and a4, bars 1–32) Piazzolla presents four eight-bar phrases in homorhythmical blocks, fully based on a two-bar ostinato. This ostinato undergoes a cumulative process of ‘thematization’ from a1 to a4, which is noticeable in the development of the ostinato: from mainly repeated notes (a1 and a2) to repeated notes alternating with brief, articulated melodic passages (a3) and eventually to articulated ostinatos without repeated notes and featuring a clear melodic profile (a4). Moreover, from the first to the fourth phrase, additional gradual processes are used to unify the formal structure and build momentum: • • •

The tempo gradually increases. The rhythmical and accentual variation of the motive is performed in such a way that it gradually diverges from the rhythmical base. The piece begins in rhythmical-accentual unison and then increasingly deviates from it. The main textural layer is thickened by a gradual increase in instrumental density.

The first two phrases (a1 and a2) are the only ones that are repeated in the entire piece. Motives alternate between rhythmical-accentual alignment and contrast with the marcato in yumba, which Piazzolla inherited from Pugliese. The repeated pitches used in Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi may be derived from fragments of the previously mentioned pieces by Gobbi (Figure 6.33 on the companion website). These repeated pitches are sometimes presented with octave leaps in the Goñi style (Figures 6.31 and 6.33), but now with a rhythmical and accentual variation in relation to the typical 3–3–2 of the pianist.

Astor Piazzolla

143

a1 (from bar 1 to bar 8), [00:00–00:23]: this first phrase is made up of a motive of two nearly identical bars, which are repeated, followed by two additional statements of the motive transposed a half-step higher (Figure 6.34 on the companion website). The use of half-step ornaments and chromatic passages is a characteristic tango feature used regularly by Piazzolla in the melody and in the bass line. He here extends the use of chromatic motion to consecutive modulations. a2 (from bar 9 to bar 16), [00:23–00:42]: this phrase is almost identical to a1. The only difference is the transposition of the motive (here, a half-step lower) and its position in the phrase (Figure 6.35 on the companion website). The sequence of transpositions used (G–A♭–G–F♯–G) mirrors the typical tango ornament of a turn, using a main note (in this case, G) plus an upper neighbour (A♭) and a lower neighbour (F♯). In addition, the repeated notes in the ostinato are built on the 5ˆ of each chord of the harmony and, thus, produce a turn in the melodic profile as well, in this case D–E♭–D–C♯–D. The turn is a figure used in many tangos and is the initial motive of Don Agustín Bardi by Horacio Salgán and of Encuentro by Gustavo Beytelmann (both analyzed in this book). Moreover, the transpositions are organized macro-rhythmically (over a long stretch of 16 bars) by the turn (A♭–F♯–G) into groups of 3, 3 and 2 segments of two bars each (indicated in Figure 6.35 on the companion website). In so doing, Piazzolla extends the application of the 3–3–2 formula to other levels of his compositions, which in this case is applied to the formal organization of phrases and sections, just as in Tres minutos con la realidad (also analyzed in this chapter). a3 and a4 present different variations of the motive. They are syncopated (in contrast with the previous ones) and, as already mentioned, increasingly thematic. a3 (from bar 17 to bar 24), [00:42–00:59], (Figure 6.36 on the companion website): the ostinato motive is repeated four times without transposition, with a marcato in 4 and a G pedal in the bass line. a4 (from bar 25 to bar 32), [00:59–01:16], (Figure 6.37 on the companion website): made up of two semi-phrases and constituting the first clear theme of the piece, while the rhythm and articulation of the previous ostinatos are maintained. The bass line also changes, becoming melodic here. This phrase ends with a diminuendo and a rallentando that prepares for the following phrase, a5. a5 (from bar 33 to bar 42), [01:16–01:45], (Fig 6.38 on the companion website): this phrase is of a contrasting, lyrical character and slower tempo, all of which foreshadow section B. A phrased violin solo begins in a medium-low register and introduces the ascending minor sixth characteristic of section C in El andariego (indicated with an oval in Figure 6.38). These bars present a clear gradual reduction of accompanimental materials: they begin with articulated rhythmical motives, then transition into a harmonic background that allows the violin to finally play freely and lead (through two added bars) to the following phrase, which is once again rhythmical. a6 (from bar 43 to bar 51), [01:45–02:02], (Figure 6.39 on the companion website): Piazzolla abruptly begins a rhythmical phrase in E minor with no modulation or preparation for the new tonality. These features, along with an increased tempo and ff dynamics, create an overwhelming contrast with the previous phrase. a6 resumes the rhythmical ostinato: bars in which the repeated notes of phrases a1–a4 are further emphasized and alternate with passages of stepwise motion. From bar

144 Astor Piazzolla 45 till the end of this phrase, Piazzolla’s typical marcato in 3–3–2 occurs for the first time, further emphasized by tutti accents on the strong beats of the marcato. Section B (from bar 53 with upbeat to bar 96), [02:02–04:05] This lyrical section, which is completely separated from the previous one through a brief pause, affirms the typical contrasting character of section B. The new tonality (F♯ minor) enters abruptly with the traditional tango upbeat figure, consisting of four ascending chromatic sixteenth notes in the bass line (in this case in the piano’s left hand alone). b1 (from bar 53 to bar 62), [02:02–02:23], (Figure 6.40 on the companion website): in this ten-bar phrase the violin plays a solo in the high register with an accompaniment consisting of two differentiated textural layers. In one layer, the rhythmical base presents a marcato in 4 with the chords (right hand of the piano) in 3–2–3 (or occasionally in 3–5, where the 2–3 is tied together); in the other layer, the bandoneon and the guitar present in unison a countermelody derived from the articulated motive of the previous section. The use of rhythmical ostinatos to accompany a melodic solo is another typical feature of Piazzolla’s music. Between the violin solo here (b1) and the violin solo in b3, a phrase (b2) is inserted and functions as a bridge. b2 (from bar 63 to bar 70), [02:23–02:40] is based on the repetition of three two-bar motives related to the ostinato at the beginning of the piece. Here the marcato is interrupted and the rhythmical base only plays long sustained chords that provide the harmony. b3 (from bar 71 to bar 84), [02:40–03:37], (Figure 6.41 on the companion website): the violin solo is again preceded by a chromatic upbeat figure with which a new tonality is established (B minor). With this solo, the violin emphatically evokes the atmosphere of Gobbi’s orchestra. The accompaniment contributes to the intimate character with its light syncopations and a slower tempo. At this point the tribute to Orlando Goñi is most apparent: the bordoneo in the piano left hand presented here was his distinctive trademark. In this phrase a sort of dialogue begins between Gobbi (evoked in the violin solo) and Goñi (evoked in the piano bass line), while Piazzolla remains silent to provide greater room for his soloists. Towards the end of b3 there is a bandoneon connecting passage to the following phrase (in G minor) in which Piazzolla again functions as the soloist, while there is a clear ascending line to fill the registral gap from the piano in bar 82 towards the new register of the bandoneon solo in bar 85 (Figure 6.42 on the companion website). b4 (from bar 85 to bar 96), [03:37–04:05]: in this bandoneon solo (which effectively starts already in bar 83) the ornamented violin phrasing continues as a countermelody over Piazzolla’s unmistakable rhythmical base in 3–3–2. Thus, Piazzolla pays tribute to his maestros while demonstrating the maturation of his own style. Section A′ (from bar 97 to bar 120), [04:05–05:02] Section A′ begins with yet another abrupt change of character. It is organized into three phrases (a7, a8 and a9) that are subdivided into semi-phrases through variations on the ostinato from the beginning of the piece (based on rhythms, marcatos and motives).

Astor Piazzolla

145

a7 (from bar 97 to bar 103), [04:05–04:19], (Figure 6.43 on the companion website): in this phrase, the ostinato from a6 resumes and is varied. It lasts seven bars, perhaps to compensate for the nine-bar duration of a8 and to create an eightbar average between the two phrases. The accompaniment ceases in order to highlight the passage of repeated notes. In the second semi-phrase, the double bass and violin resume the marcato in 4, yet this time in an original fashion with non-pitched effects (strappata and tambor). As the main motive of this phrase is repeated there is an increase in instrumental density through accumulation: one layer is added each bar, culminating in a parallel passage by the bandoneon, electric guitar and the right hand of the piano. This gradual accumulation of layers demonstrates the development of orchestration in tango music. a8 (from bar 104 to bar 112), [04:19–04:41]: a modulation to B♭ minor marks the beginning of this phrase, which features a rhythmical motive derived from section A. The non-pitched marcato is maintained (connecting phrases a7 and a8) while the tempo slows down. There occurs a decrease in both the instrumental density of the theme (only the bandoneon continues playing the main textural layer) and the rhythmical density of the accompaniment, which returns to a pitched marcato in the second semi-phrase. a9 (from bar 113 to bar 120), [04:41–05:02]: in this third and final phrase of section A′, the ostinato motive – now in tempo primo – is again varied through syncopated rhythms, which will return in the Coda. Here the so-called mugre (filth) effect, so frequently used in Piazzolla’s music, is introduced (Figure 6.44 on the companion website). The mugre effect consists of playing a line with two simultaneous notes a minor second apart, the main note usually being the upper note. It is widely used in syncopated fills and in order to dramatize a melodic line. According to Gabriela Mauriño, this technique was introduced in tango by violinists and later became incorporated by bandoneonists as a standard device on their instrument (2008, p. 24). Section B′ (from bar 121 to bar 137), [05:02–06:08] Section B′ begins in a new tonality (B minor) with a phrased violin solo that literally quotes the three ascending minor sixths from section C in El andariego. This solo encompasses two phrases (b5 and b6) and features a minimal accompaniment by the double bass and the guitar. The double bass plays three consecutive segments, each with a different marcato (syncopated, in 2 half notes and then in 4) while the guitar plays small arpeggiated countermelodies. The lack of bandoneon and piano contributes to the prominence of the soloist and creates contrast with the following phrase. In the last bars of b6 the ascending minor sixth of El andariego is again quoted. Unlike the abrupt transitions in previous sections, here a violent accelerando and crescendo lead to the final section A″. A″ (from bar 138 to bar 161), [06:08–06:54] In this last occurrence of A, phrases a10 and a11 are irregular in length. These phrases are divided into semi-phrase variations constructed from previous materials. A″ starts with four connecting bars (bars 138–141, 06:08–06:15) that function as a bridge and prepare for the character of the following phrases through an increase in tempo and dynamics while modulating to C minor.

146 Astor Piazzolla a10 (from bar 142 to bar 150), [06:15–06:31], (Figure 6.45 on the companion website): Piazzolla’s typical virtuosity is again displayed. The bandoneon plays a melody generated by a repeated motive that grows in rhythmical density while the textural and registral densities increase. This process of cumulative development of the motive is innovative in tango music. The rhythmical base plays in 3–3–2, and the guitar and the violin reinforce the phrase, first by means of rhythmical-percussive effects (bars 142–145) and then by thickening the melody (bars 146–150). a11 (from bar 151 to bar 161), [06:31–06:54]: in this last phrase the final tonality of the piece (C♯ minor) enters abruptly, without modulation or preparation. Throughout the phrase there is a superimposition of previously used rhythms and effects, such as the marcato in yumba, accentual contrasts, thematic motives, the mugre effect and repeated notes. In the second semi-phrase (bars 155–158) there is an unmistakable quote of another fragment in section C in El andariego (Figure 6.46), played in unison by the guitar and the bandoneon (Figure 6.47, both on the companion website). The phrase concludes with a four-bar segment that continues the quote with variations and leads to the Coda. Coda (from bar 162 to bar 170), [06:54–07:24] The motive from a9 returns in a varied form, as two four-bar symmetrical semiphrases with a marcato in 4 and a descending bass typical of Piazzolla. A rallentando and a diminuendo lead to the end of the piece – again in marked contrast to the traditional tango ending with the usual I-V-I (on beats one, two and three, respectively, in the last bar of the piece).

Adiós Nonino Music by Astor Piazzolla, 1959 Copyright © by Warner/Chappell Music Argentina Reproduced by kind permission of Warner/Chappell Music Argentina First recorded on the album Piazzolla interpreta a Piazzolla in 1961, for the record company RCAVictor. The analysis that follows is based on the recording from the album Adiós Nonino, for the record company Trova, 1969. Astor Piazzolla, bandoneon; Dante Amicarelli, piano; Antonio Agri, violin; Kicho Díaz, double bass and Oscar López Ruiz, electric guitar Duration: 8′02″ This iconic piece was written by Astor Piazzolla in memory of his deceased father. Piazzolla believed it to be the best of all of his works: The number one piece is “Adiós Nonino.” I challenged myself to write a better one, and I couldn’t. It has a very intimate feel, almost funereal and yet it blew everything up. The day we premiered it with the Quintet, the musicians and I said, “This one isn’t worth shit. No one is going to like it.” And yet there it is. It was a period in the Quintet’s life in which all the pieces had the spunk of “Calambre,” “Los poseídos,” “Lo que vendrá.” “Adiós Nonino” ended wrong,

Astor Piazzolla

147

but like life: it just fades away. People liked it from the start, perhaps because it has a mysterious air, a melody that plays off a very strong rhythmic foundation. Then it changes key and finally that glorious ending with a sad resolution. Perhaps that’s why people liked it: it was different from everything else. (Gorín 2001, p. 81)21 Adiós Nonino has many of the typical features of Piazzolla’s music already analyzed in this chapter: more modulations than in traditional tango, ostinato motives, long solos with unvarying instrumentation and the rhythmical formula 3–3–2. Piazzolla also maintains some attributes of traditional tango: the piece is mostly crafted from two formal sections (A and B) that contrast in tempo and character and consist mainly of regular eight-bar phrases, which are occasionally extended in order to demarcate new sections (a technique already observed in other pieces analyzed in this volume). However, other characteristics of this piece occur less frequently in tango music, such as the extensive solo for the piano in the beginning and the subdued ending of the piece, dissolving through a rallentando and a diminuendo into silence. Two previously examined concepts are also reintroduced. First, the music is composed for specific performers: Piazzolla writes with the quintet’s musicians in mind and always highlights their skills by means of tailor-made passages in which they can excel. Second, the group of soloists: both the solos and the countermelodies in the accompaniment are interpreted in a phrased way (where accented notes rarely align with the beat), thereby generating a variety of overlapping phrased lines. The following analysis is based on the 1969 recording (including the previously mentioned piano solo) and a transcription of the score copied by José Bragato that circulates – as many others – among tango musicians by means of photocopies (in recent times also as a PDF) of the handwritten version. Figure 6.48 shows the formal scheme of the piece and its main characteristics. Section Intro Sub-s. Bar #’s No. of bars 57 Theme piano Marcato Tonality (Ab m) Main -

A a1 a2 0 8 9 19 9 8+3 bnd. bd+gt ymb-4 in 4 Am rhythmical

Section A Sub-s. a3 a4 a5 a6 52 59 60 67 68 76 77 84 Bar #’s No. of bars 8 8 8 8+1 Theme (tutti) bnd-vl-guit Marc. in 4 in 3-3-2 Ton. C#m Dm Eb m Em Main rhythmical

Figure 6.48 Formal scheme of Adiós Nonino

B b2 b1 28 36 37 44 8+1 8 violin in 4 (mil.) C E melodic

b1 20 27 8

[b3] 45 51 4+3 (tutti) (long)

B Coda b2 b1 b3 94 102 103 110 111 116 117 122 8+1 8 4+2 6 bandoneon in 4 (mil.) 3-3-2 (long) sync. G B G#m rhythmical melodic

b1 86 93 8

148 Astor Piazzolla Initial piano solo [00:00–02:38] Piazzolla added the opening solo of Adiós Nonino especially for pianist Dante Amicarelli after the piece was already finished and recorded. This opening solo introduces an element alien to the language of the genre, a peculiarity that is emphasized by its extreme duration – 2′38″, almost the full length of a traditional tango – and its development, more related to jazz and certain forms of Western art music than to the language of tango. Despite its improvisatory character, the solo is fully notated. Structurally, it is divided into two sections that each present different phrases. The first section (bars 1–18) contains the typical features of an introduction: materials of the piece are presented in a discontinuous, nondirectional way, and the main themes are not revealed. The second section (bars 19–57), however, introduces theme B in a variety of ways: literally, varied, transposed and with cadential passages between phrases. Lastly, some fragments of this second section were generated from material taken from the Coda of the piece. Section A (from bar 0 to bar 19), [02:38–03:20] Section A is of a rhythmic, strongly articulated character. It is based on the piece Nonino, written by Piazzolla in 1954 (also dedicated to his father) and presents two phrases in A minor that complement each other (a1 and a2). a1 (from bar 0 to bar 8), [02:38–02:58], (Figure 6.49): in this phrase the bandoneon plays the theme over a repeated two-bar accompanimental motive. The theme consists of a repeating two-bar thematic motive that begins with an ascending arpeggiated triad and ends with an ascending chromatic appoggiatura followed by a descending chromatic passage. This motive is stated first on the tonic (A minor) and later moves to the dominant, with the same ending used for both (Figure 6.49). The final note of this motive is anticipated by an eighth note before the first beat of the following bar, generating a syncopation. In the first appearance of the motive (bars 0–2) this final note is held until the end of bar 2, stretching the motive’s length to three bars and creating a standstill that is only resolved in the following bar. There we can observe another irregular feature: the typical chromatic sixteenth-note upbeat figure in the bass is placed on the first beat of bar 2 instead of the fourth of bar 1. The end note A (on the second beat) is therefore perceived as the beginning of the bar, thus destabilizing the meter. Some would hear this irregularity as a 5/4 bar followed by a 3/4 bar. With this interpretation, the chromatic upbeat maintains its original function. From there, the phrase continues normally, with the usual marcato in 4 emphasized in yumba and the motive alternating between tonic and dominant harmonies, thickened by the addition of the guitar to the main textural layer. a2 (from bar 9 to bar 19), [02:58–03:20]: this phrase begins with two contrasting bars (bars 9–10) before resuming the main motive, which is repeated twice and then varied in order to lead to the brief modulating bridge (bars 18–19) preceding section B. In the bridge, the slower tempo and cantabile character of theme B are established. Section B (from bar 20 to bar 51), [03:20–04:52] Section B presents the typical contrast to section A, now with music of a slower, more melodic character. In bar 19 the violin begins a solo that encompasses three

Astor Piazzolla

149

Figure 6.49 Beginning of a1, bars 0–7 [02:38–02:56]

whole phrases (b1, b2 and b1′). The violin’s upbeat figure derives from the ascending opening of the motive in section A. b1 (from bar 20 to bar 27), [03:20–03:50]: the celebrated theme of Adiós Nonino is presented in the tonality of the relative major, C (Figure 6.50). It is divided into

150 Astor Piazzolla

Figure 6.50 Violin theme in section B, bars 20 with upbeat figure–38 [03:20–04:24]

Figure 6.51 Theme of Milonga del ángel, bars 20–38

two symmetrical semi-phrases a whole step apart, made up of brief, one-bar motives (unlike the two-bar motives of theme A). The motive’s melodic profile is quite simple: a single pitch followed by an ever-changing upbeat figure. The motivic and rhythmical structure of the theme is similar to that of Milonga del ángel (Figure 6.51), also composed by Piazzolla (and analyzed in this chapter). As already mentioned, the simple melodic lines in both works acquire more personality through a well-phrased performance. A melodic profile based on repeated notes is not something frequently encountered in tango. Some examples found include Nostalgias by Juan Carlos Cobián, Che bandoneón by Aníbal Troilo, Volver by Carlos Gardel, Naranjo en flor by Homero and Virgilio Expósito, and Tú and Fuimos by José Dames. The relationship between theme and rhythmical base is notable in both section A and section B. In section A the motive begins with an eighth-note rest and the marcato begins on a downbeat (Figure 6.49), while in section B the motive begins on a downbeat and the marcato harmonies are syncopated (Figure 6.52), while the bass remains in 4. The resulting rhythmical-accentual contrast animates the piece

Astor Piazzolla

151

Figure 6.52 Beginning of section B, bars 19–21 [03:20–03:31]

and helps to differentiate the layers. The organization of the bass line in this segment is another representative feature of Piazzolla’s music. According to musicologist Ramón Pelinsky, some repeated formulas in the bass line are inter-textual: throughout his diverse compositions, Piazzolla invents new musical surfaces and places them over harmonic structures similar to those used in previous works with their accompanying bass lines (2008, p. 40). In Adiós Nonino, the bass line consists of four quarter notes repeating a single pitch, which descend with each new bar (first chromatically, then diatonically), leaping upwards at each new semi-phrase to begin the process again (Figure 6.53). The stillness of this section is due to the repetitive nature of both the melody and the bass, which may be related to the conveyance of a mournful air. According to musicologist Allan Atlas (2008, p. 80), both the minor ninths – B♭ over an A7 chord and C over a B7 chord in bars 23 and 27 (indicated in Figure 6.50 with rounded rectangles) – could be associated with the idea of death, featured both in this piece as well as Piazzolla’s María de Buenos Aires (1967–1968). b2 (from bar 28 to bar 36), [03:50–04:15]: this phrase, also divided into two semi-phrases, complements the previous one. In the first semi-phrase (bars 28–31)

152 Astor Piazzolla

Figure 6.53 Double bass line in section B, bars 20–36 [03:24–04:18]

Figure 6.54 Beginning of b2, bars 28–29 [03:50–03:56]

the rhythmical base remains in 4 while the harmonic part of the marcato is transformed into a two-bar motivic countermelody (Figure 6.54). In the second semiphrase (bars 32–36) the accompaniment is brought together into a single layer: a simple whole note per bar that leaves room for the soloist to phrase. The double

Astor Piazzolla

153

bass again plays quarter notes that descend from bar to bar, diatonically in the first semi-phrase and chromatically in the second. The motive also undergoes a process of expansion (Figure 6.50): one bar long in b1, about one and a half bars long in the first semi-phrase of b2, and two bars long in the second semi-phrase of b2. In the second semi-phrase (bar 32) the upbeat figure with which section A started reappears. Then, the upbeat figure used in bar 19 to begin b1 is employed again at the end of b2 (bar 36), resulting in a one-bar extension that demarcates the beginning of b1′ (Figure 6.50). b1′ (from bar 37 to bar 44), [04:15–04:39], (Figure 6.55): this phrase restates b1 in a new tonality (E major), in a higher register and with minor variations. The violin continues to play the theme, with a countermelody (ripieno) by the rhythmical and accentual unison of one part of the harmonic accompaniment (the piano’s right hand and the bandoneon’s left hand). It is the first moment of the piece that the double bass, the ripieno and the theme begin on the downbeat. Their rhythmical and accentual alignment on the first beat of every bar marks this phrase in a notable way. The

Figure 6.55 Beginning of b1′, bars 37–38 [04:18–04:24]

154 Astor Piazzolla bass line also has a strong similarity to that of Milonga del ángel. It consists of a rhythm derived from the milonga campera, played with a single pitch and descending chromatically each bar. In the second semi-phrase, the melodic profile is altered and the dynamics are increased, leading to the following phrase [b3]. [b3] (from bar 45 to bar 51), [04:39–04:52]: this fragment functions as a bridge to the return of section A. The previous phrases of section B (b1, b2 and b1′) create the expectation that we will move next to b2′. However, [b3] differs greatly from b2, creating a stronger division with the following section. It is also divided into two semi-phrases, in this case four and three bars in length. In the first semi-phrase (bars 45–48) the theme from b1 is varied and presented homorhythmically (the first occurrence of this texture) with a repeated quarter-note rhythm, emphasized by ff dynamics (Figure 6.56). In the second semi-phrase (bars 49–51, Figure 6.57), the theme from b1 is again varied, although its rhythm is maintained. Finally, in this phrase the double bass joins the main textural layer in a full tutti.

Figure 6.56 Beginning of [b3], bars 45–46 [04:39–04:42]

Astor Piazzolla

155

Figure 6.57 End of [b3], bars 48–51 [04:43–04:52]

Section A′ (from bar 52 to bar 85), [04:52–06:03] This section contains four phrases (a3, a4, a5 and a6) – twice as many as in section A – in which the A motive is transformed into a two-bar rhythmical ostinato (Figure 6.58). Each two-bar ostinato is presented first in the tonic and then in the dominant, forming a semi-phrase that is then repeated to form a regular eight-bar phrase. In section A′ every phrase presents a new combination of materials from section A and a new tonality one half-step higher: a3 is in C♯ minor (the relative minor of the previous phrase), a4 in D minor, a5 in E♭ minor and a6 in E minor. This ascending chromatic motion in some way compensates for the descending chromatic pattern of the bass in previous phrases, repeating a technique already analyzed in Milonga del ángel and Tres minutos con la realidad. a3 (from bar 52 to bar 59), [04:52–05:09]: the instrumentation in this phrase is divided into two blocks. The main textural layer is presented by the piano’s right hand, the bandoneon’s left hand, the guitar and the violin, while the left hand of the piano and the double bass perform a repeated quarter-note bass line in stepwise motion (Figure 6.58). a4 (from bar 60 to bar 67), [05:09–05:25]: this phrase maintains the rhythm of the previous phrase, a3, but now with a different melodic profile (Figure 6.59). As in the beginning of the piece, a rhythmical countermelody functions as a fill during the moments when the theme features long notes.

156 Astor Piazzolla

Figure 6.58 Beginning of a3, bars 52–59 [04:52–05:09]

Figure 6.59 Beginning of a4, bars 60–61 [05:09–05:13]

Astor Piazzolla

157

Figure 6.60 Beginning of a5, bars 68–69 [05:25–05:29]

a5 (from bar 68 to bar 76), [05:25–05:41]: the main textural layer maintains a rhythm similar to the previous phrases a3 and a4, but now with a melodic profile of descending half-steps (Figure 6.60). The rhythmical base presents the essential 3–3–2 rhythmic pattern. a6 (from bar 77 to bar 85), [05:41–06:03]: the last variation on the initial motive is presented with a rhythmical marcato in 4 and timbral-percussive effects on the violin (chicharra and tambor). As happened previously, a bar is added at the end to clearly demarcate the beginning of the next section, B′.

158 Astor Piazzolla Section B′ (from bar 86 to bar 116), [06:03–07:33] Here, the contrasting tempo and lyrical character of section B return. This section is divided into four phrases in which the bandoneon presents the main theme in a phrased solo of unusual length (31 bars). b1″ (from bar 86 to bar 93), [06:03–06:31]: b1 recurs in G major with the addition of an accompanimental countermelody, again derived from the initial ascending motive (Figure 6.61).

Figure 6.61 Beginning of b1″, bars 86–87 [06:03–06:11]

Astor Piazzolla

159

b2′ (from bar 94 to bar 102), [06:31–06:59]: b2 recurs transposed to G major. A connecting bar is added at the end, introducing the 3–3–2 rhythm of the following phrase (b1‴). There is a gradual transition to the subsequent tempo and dynamics. b1‴ (from bar 103 to bar 110), [06:59–07:17]: the climax of the piece is reached in this phrase. The lyrical theme of Adiós Nonino appears for the last time, in a quicker tempo, with ff dynamics and emphasized both by the marcato in 3–3–2 and by a lyrical countermelody in the violin. Again, all the instruments enter on the downbeat, generating the same effect as in b1′. b3′ (from bar 111 to bar 116), [07:17–07:33]: b3 returns with slight variations and leads to the Coda. Coda (from bar 117 to bar 122), [07:33–08:02]: the violin evokes the lyrical B theme for the last time as the piece fades away with a rallentando and a diminuendo that lead to the final ascending arpeggio, again in contrast to the typical tango I-V-I ending.

Chapter review and additional remarks The pieces composed by Piazzolla feature, on the one hand, new elements of vital importance for the development of tango music and, on the other, traditional aspects of the genre that he advanced further and which have now become linked to his style. The indelible mark he left on tango is so strong that many ensembles ‘after the Piazzolla era’ emulate his style. He also played a central role in the globalization of tango music while helping to raise it to a new status of concert chamber music. The main musical elements and techniques analyzed in this chapter are summarized in the following. Formal, textural and melodic features •

•

Creation of melodic lines: Piazzolla’s themes – based on structural notes and abundant ornamentation – are not essentially different from those of traditional tango. However, many of his melodies are fashioned from a limited number of materials that gain significance through their superb interpretation and performance. Some melodies are derived from the marcato bass line (Milonga del ángel), an idea that Piazzolla may have taken from La bordona by Emilio Balcarce (analyzed in Chapter 7). Some themes simply consist of repeated notes (Adiós Nonino and Milonga del ángel) or use only a single pitch in an entire semi-phrase (Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi). The melodic profiles based on repeated notes are enriched by ornaments and orchestration, as in the beginning of Milonga del ángel, in which the piano performs acciaccaturas that are typical of the bandoneon’s phrasing. The use of repetitive motives as a main textural layer was not common in tango. This technique, introduced by Pugliese, was systematized by Piazzolla in many of his works. Formal organization of motives, phrases and sections: Piazzolla’s works generally comprise the usual formal sections A and B, contrasting in both

160 Astor Piazzolla tempo and character. Sections mainly consist of regular eight-bar phrases, which are sometimes extended to signal modulations or formal changes (a device already seen in Salgán’s and Pugliese’s works). The phrases and sections may be interwoven (Milonga del ángel), tied together by a connecting passage (Tres minutos con la realidad) or separated abruptly through a brief pause (Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi). Phrases are generally made up of two-bar motives, which are repeated to form semi-phrases, as in traditional tango. However, Piazzolla also introduces some innovative techniques that had never before been used in tango: •

•

•

•

•

• •

Expanded duration of sections: Piazzolla creates sections made up of many phrases, which results in unusually long works. This is a major feature characteristic to his style, which allows other devices of his language, such as extensive solos, to be used more frequently. Asymmetrical formal sections: Piazzolla also creates sections with a varying number of phrases, generating asymmetrical formal structures unusual for traditional tango. In Tres minutos con la realidad, for instance, the brief section B is simply a contrasting passage used to prevent monotony. Use of monothematic forms: in some works, the omnipresence of ostinatos results in a seemingly monothematic form. In Tres minutos con la realidad, for instance, the ‘contrasting’ section B is achieved by introducing a melodic line, but the ostinato from section A continues. Use of repeated formulas in the bass line: Piazzolla invents new musical surfaces over similar harmonic structures with their bass lines. This can occur within the same piece or between different pieces in which those materials are used intertextually.

Duration of solos: the length of the solos in Piazzolla’s works is unprecedented in the history of tango. This innovation might have arisen from his close relationship to jazz and connects with his use of expanded formal sections and his treatment of tango ensembles as a group of soloists. Some noteworthy examples are the opening piano solo of Adiós Nonino and the bandoneon solo of Milonga del ángel, analyzed in this chapter as well as solos within pieces like Contrabajissimo, Otoño porteño and Resurrección del ángel. In addition, many solos contain elements derived from Western art music and jazz, such as percussive chords in Bartók’s style on the piano and various virtuosic passages that sound improvised even though Piazzolla usually notated them in full. Thematic generalization: the materials introduced in the theme and the bass line in the first phrase of a piece are reused in successive phrases, in varied and transposed forms (Tres minutos con la realidad). Use of rhythmical-melodic ostinatos: two-bar ostinatos lacking a clear theme – freely transposed to various pitches without modulation – are characteristic of Piazzolla’s music. The systematization of this technique can be observed in many of his compositions in which the ostinatos may function as a main textural layer, as a ripieno or as an accompanimental figure.

Astor Piazzolla • •

•

• •

•

• •

•

161

Cumulative development of the motive: a melody is generated through a repeated motive that grows in rhythmical density from bar to bar (Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi). Use of phrasing: Piazzolla uses typical tango phrasing in all of his pieces, particularly in the solos. As usual in a phrased solo, the long notes of the melody – written on the downbeat – rarely align with the first beat of each bar in performance, while the ornamentation used often differs from the score as well as from recording to recording. In the case of the quintet, the accompanimental countermelodies are phrased as well, thus generating multiple overlapping phrasings, a core feature of this ‘ensemble of soloists’. Textural treatment: most of Piazzolla’s pieces have a texture consisting of melody and accompaniment, as is typical of tango. Still, the occasional passage introduces polyphony through imitation or through different and overlapping melodic lines (Tres minutos con la realidad). Piazzolla also composed true counterpoint textures, such as the fugue in María de Buenos Aires and his piece Fuga y misterio, due to his Western art music composition studies and his admiration for Bach, thus introducing this element in tango. Contrary motion between textural layers: in some pieces (Milonga del ángel, Tres minutos con la realidad, Adiós Nonino), the ascending motion of the theme contrasts with the descending motion of the bass. Use of a tango rhythm at the formal level: Piazzolla transfers the rhythmical pattern of his most characteristic rhythm 3–3–2 to diverse levels of the formal structure. He creates phrases consisting of groups of 3, 3 and 2 bars and sections consisting of groups of 3, 3 and 2 phrases. This constitutes a deviation from the formal structure of traditional tango, which is usually based on binary patterns such as simple meter, two semi-phrases within a phrase, two phrases within a section and two sections within a piece. Moreover, in Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi even chord changes are macro-rhythmically organized into groups of 3, 3 and 2 bars. Use of tango-related melodic features at the phrase level: in Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi, the sequence of transpositions used (G-A♭-G-F♯-G) mirrors the typical tango ornament of a turn, using a main note (in this case, G) plus an upper neighbour (A♭) and a lower neighbour (F♯). Introduction of static sections or phrases: Piazzolla presents entire sections in which the instrumentation, dynamics, register, rhythmical base, harmony and other aspects that are usually varied in tango are kept unchanged. Approach to ensemble writing: Piazzolla treats his ensembles (especially the quintet) as groups of soloists, a tendency that was most likely inspired by the jazz bands he admired. Many of his innovations in composition and orchestration stem from this approach. Piazzolla writes with the quintet’s musicians in mind and always highlights their unique strengths by means of tailor-made passages with which they will excel (this also relates to the previously mentioned length of instrumental solos). Unifying processes: Piazzolla utilizes gradual processes that work to unify the piece and that progress throughout multiple phrases and formal sections to

162 Astor Piazzolla

•

•

create compositional direction. In Tres minutos con la realidad, for instance, he connects the various transpositions of the motive by steadily increasing the instrumental density, dynamics and tessitura. Use of quotes: in Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi, Piazzolla employs both literal and stylistic quotes that evoke the orchestras of the 1940s. This technique was taken from certain forms of Western art music, although it can also be traced, to a certain extent, in pieces by Salgán. Use of typical tango elements: Piazzolla’s music consists mainly of traditional tango materials, although they appear frequently in new contexts. These elements include: yumba, 3–3–2 and other standard marcatos, fraseo, articulations, Goñi’s octaves, ornaments, bordoneo, glissandos, half-step appoggiaturas, chromaticism, arrastres and timbral and percussive effects in all of the instruments (chicharra, tambor, strappata, box slaps, etc.).

Orchestration •

•

• •

Use of instruments alien to tango: the timbre of the electric guitar constitutes another innovation in the tango world. In Piazzolla’s music it is frequently used to provide harmonic fills and countermelodies that contrast rhythmically and accentually with the rhythmical base. In addition, the electric guitar often performs soloistically or in unison with the countermelody or the rhythmical base. At times, Piazzolla used the drums and the vibraphone,22 also unusual instruments in tango. Aspects related to register, articulation and dynamics: Piazzolla’s music features no major deviation from tradition in its treatment of register, articulation and dynamics; he uses these elements to create contrasts and variety. However, he also presents phrases and sections in which these parameters remain fixed. For instance, the bandoneon in Milonga del ángel plays mostly legato and in a restricted tessitura throughout the entire piece. The technical abilities of his musicians enabled him to introduce bold innovations, such as the inclusion of virtuosic solos for all of the instruments (even including the double bass). The use of dynamics in performance is taken to a new extreme. Changes in instrumental density: Piazzolla occasionally uses a sequential process of instrumentation. Through a gradual accumulation or dispersal of instruments, he expands and contracts the orchestral mass. Use of the bandoneon: the bandoneon is clearly the main instrument of his ensembles. His soloistic role is demonstrated in extended solos and virtuosic passages that place him in the centre of his ensembles. He composed and arranged music motivated by his drive to play on stage.

Variation techniques •

Variation in parametric stability: as already seen in other chapters, a basic rule of tango music – found as well in Piazzolla’s pieces – is to keep one parameter stable while other parameters are modified.

Astor Piazzolla •

•

• •

•

•

163

Use of modulation: the modulations used by Piazzolla to vary and enrich his pieces are innovative due to the fact that they are more numerous than is typical in traditional tango and include many foreign tonalities. The new tonalities are established through either modulating passages or abrupt shifts, sometimes preceded only by the traditional tango upbeat of four ascending chromatic sixteenth notes in the bass (Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi). The frequent changes of tonality were most likely used to enliven his repetitive patterns and to provide variation to his longer sections and compositions. Use of extended tonality: Piazzolla composed tonal music. Yet he used altered chords, superimposed chords and octatonic scales (Tres minutos con la realidad), which rendered some of his compositions tonally ambiguous, a concept alien to the tango tradition. He also used passages of superimposed or successive fourths, in contrast to the more common harmonies and melodies based on thirds or sixths. Use of the bass line: motion by primarily half-steps or whole-steps gives a new profile to the typical tango bass line. Relationship between theme and rhythmical base: in Adiós Nonino, when the theme is played on the downbeat, the accompanimental chords are syncopated, and when the theme is syncopated, the marcato is played on the downbeat. The resulting rhythmical-accentual contrast enlivens the piece and helps to differentiate the textural layers (a technique inherited from the tango tradition, as observed in Julio De Caro’s music). The use of rhythmical ostinatos to accompany melodic solos is another typical feature of Piazzolla’s music. Ambiguity between background and foreground: this is a variation technique quite typical of tango music and already mentioned in previous chapters. It occurs when a secondary line takes the foreground and the main theme is concealed, hidden or positioned as a background layer. Process of ‘thematization’ of a motive: this process is evident in the development of the ostinato in the beginning of Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi. The ostinato progresses from predominantly repeated notes to repeated notes interspersed with brief melodic fragments and eventually to articulated lines with a clear melodic profile.

Rhythm and meter •

•

Systematization of the 3–3–2 rhythm: Piazzolla takes the traditional 3–3–2 rhythm and uses it so extensively that it becomes a main element of his music. In addition to its original function as a rhythmical base, he extends this formula to other levels of compositional organization, such as the formal structure of phrases and sections, the organization of modulations and the rhythmical shape of melodies and countermelodies. Use of polyrhythm and meter: Piazzolla explores the many possibilities inherent in rhythmical patterns. His works feature several variations on the 3–3–2 rhythm (2–3–3, 3–2–3, 3-3-3-3-3-1 and 3–5, among others), both

164 Astor Piazzolla

•

•

•

•

•

•

successively and simultaneously. These new rhythmical patterns include the polyrhythmical use of short ostinatos that are repeated independently from the 4/4 meter. A typical feature of Piazzolla’s works is the bass line made up of four quarter notes per measure, which strongly establishes the meter and contrasts with the 3–3–2 pattern in another textural layer. This systematic use of superimposition of equivalent meters (4/4 and 3–3–2/8) is one of Piazzolla’s major contributions to tango. Use of traditional marcato: Piazzolla uses the rhythmical marcatos inherited from the tradition. In contrast to Pugliese and Salgán, Piazzolla rarely combines different marcatos within a single phrase, thus maintaining a sense of continuity to his works. He occasionally thickens the bass line of the piano left hand with intervals of a perfect fifth, as Salgán and Pugliese did, and as will be seen again in pieces by Beytelmann (Chapter 7). As is usual in tango, the bass maintains a steady beat, which allows the rest of the instruments to phrase freely. Renewed use of typical marcatos and bass lines: Piazzolla re-creates some characteristics of traditional marcatos. An example of this is the atypical use of arrastres in the bass, which he applies in many consecutive bars or on the first beat of a bar instead of on the fourth (Adiós Nonino). The repetition of pitches in the bass is also innovative (although it may be related to the rudimentary expression of harmony in older tangos), as is the simplification of the bass line’s profile, which often has fewer pitches (such as the omission of 3ˆ in Milonga del ángel) or simply repeats a single pitch. In many cases, the bars featuring repeated notes have a descending motion from bar to bar. The use of homorhythmical accompaniment is another characteristic feature of Piazzolla’s music. Systematization of the slow milonga rhythm: Piazzolla systematizes this rhythm, adding it permanently to the genre in a new form that combines elements from the two traditional kinds of milonga: campera and ciudadana. He uses this pattern as an accompanimental base as well as for shaping melodic lines. Use of a non-pitched marcato: in Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi, for instance, Piazzolla creates a marcato in 4 with non-pitched effects (strappata, box slaps and tambor) that temporarily avoids confirming the harmony. These kinds of effects were traditionally used to enliven an articulated passage but were rarely found without an underlying pitched rhythmical base. Extended use of timbral and percussive effects: Piazzolla makes extended use of timbral and percussive effects in all instruments (listed in Chapter 2), taking this common practice of traditional tango music to a new extreme and creating a more complex musical surface. Additionally, all of these effects are fully notated in his scores. Use of varied tango endings: Piazzolla finishes his pieces with a range of formulas that diverge from the usual I-V-I (on beats one, two and three, respectively) in the last bar of the piece. Instead, he systematizes the use of descending glissandos, slow ascending arpeggios and endings that fade away with a rallentando and a diminuendo.

Astor Piazzolla

165

Notes 1 Astor Piazzolla: a memoir. Written by Natalio Gorín © 2001 Amadeus Press. All Rights Reserved. International Copyright Secured. Used by Permission of Hal Leonard Europe Limited. 2 Astor Piazzolla: a memoir. Written by Natalio Gorín © 2001 Amadeus Press. All Rights Reserved. International Copyright Secured. Used by Permission of Hal Leonard Europe Limited. 3 Astor Piazzolla: a memoir. Written by Natalio Gorín © 2001 Amadeus Press. All Rights Reserved. International Copyright Secured. Used by Permission of Hal Leonard Europe Limited. 4 Personal interview, February 2014. 5 Astor Piazzolla: a memoir. Written by Natalio Gorín © 2001 Amadeus Press. All Rights Reserved. International Copyright Secured. Used by Permission of Hal Leonard Europe Limited. 6 Considering pattern b) with its four eighth notes, of which the first and third are the main beats. 7 The tie is not always notated. Tango musicians will perform the passage in this way even when a tie is not written into the score. 8 For further information on phrasing in the bandoneon, see Santiago Cimadevilla’s thesis (2010) Improvisation on Bandoneon solos in Argentine Tango – How is a bandoneon solo constructed? A study of the soloistic language of Astor Piazzolla. 9 Piazzolla may have been inspired by the 1952 Sonata for piano of his teacher Alberto Ginastera, which has similar features. In her 2008 essay, Malena Kuss presents a comparative analysis of Ginastera’s sonata and Piazzolla’s tango, detailing outstanding similarities between them. 10 The score shown in the figures corresponds to the recording analyzed here. The quintet’s orchestration is similar, but without the harp, second violin, viola or violoncello parts. 11 José Bragato was a violoncellist, pianist, arranger and composer (1915–2017). He was a member of Piazzolla’s Octeto Buenos Aires and the one who copied and transcribed most of Piazzolla’s pieces. 12 This piece is notated in a 4/8 meter instead of the usual 4/4. Yet, the names of the accompanying models are maintained, marcato in 4 here consisting of four eighth notes. 13 As usual, the guitar featured in Bragato’s score and in many recordings of this piece plays filling and accompanimental passages, sometimes aligning with and sometimes counteracting the rhythmical and accentual patterns of the rest of the instruments. 14 Some examples of percussive chords in piano music by Bartók include the Allegro barbaro, the Piano Concerto No. 1 and the Sonata for Two Pianos and Percussion. 15 In the aforementioned essay from 2008, Malena Kuss claims that this theme is similar to that of Adiós Nonino, also by Piazzolla, analyzed later in this chapter. 16 Astor Piazzolla: a memoir. Written by Natalio Gorín © 2001 Amadeus Press. All Rights Reserved. International Copyright Secured. Used by Permission of Hal Leonard Europe Limited. Also found, in the original Spanish version, in José María Otero’s Blog Tangos al bardo. See Bibliography. 17 Interview with Astor Piazzolla in 1973 on the TV show Sábados de Tango, hosted by Miguel Ángel Manzi. See Bibliography. 18 In lunfardo [tango jargon], yeites refers to (among other things) tricks, special abilities, gestures and typical features of a certain musician in their performance of tangos. A yeite might also be a personal way of playing or expressing a musical element and therefore should not be confused with tango effects on the instruments (like chicharra, tambor, etc.). Among tango musicians, it is frequent to hear expressions such as ‘¡qué yeite tenía Troilo para tocar!’ [Troilo played with such yeite!], referring to someone’s singular skills in the performance and interpretation of tangos.

166 Astor Piazzolla 19 Approximate dates, as there is no record of the precise year of its composition. 20 When Pugliese was asked what he liked most about Piazzolla, he answered: ‘his drive’. That reply serves as an excellent summary of Piazzolla’s musical personality. 21 Astor Piazzolla: a memoir. Written by Natalio Gorín © 2001 Amadeus Press. All Rights Reserved. International Copyright Secured. Used by Permission of Hal Leonard Europe Limited. 22 As mentioned earlier in this volume, the vibraphone had already been used in Osvaldo Fresedo’s orchestra.

7

Gustavo Beytelmann – his life, musical style and ensembles and his contribution to instrumental tango music Bárbara Varassi Pega

Introduction Pianist, arranger, composer and ensemble leader (b. 1945) In recent years, many innovations have been made in tango music. One such innovation involves a fusion of genres, by means of which, to a greater or lesser extent, the structural elements of the musical language, tango, are built upon or redefined. The work of Gustavo Beytelmann is exemplary of such innovation: it features a fusion of twentieth century Western art music and popular music, tango and jazz.

168

Gustavo Beytelmann

According to Esteban Buch, who argues that tango is undoubtedly the main reference for Beytelmann’s music: The generic complexity of his [Piazzolla’s] music opened up new possibilities that have seldom been explored in a truly original fashion. Gustavo Beytelmann’s work . . . may well represent the most relevant proposal in this regard, capable of adding what Piazzolla’s world precisely lacked: the ‘true’ contemporary music or, better said, that line of contemporary music that since the fifties did not turn to Nadia Boulanger but to Pierre Boulez, and in Beytelmann’s particular case, to Francisco Kröpfl. (Buch 2012, p. 19) Born in Venado Tuerto, Argentina, into a family of musicians and music lovers, Beytelmann played classical and popular piano repertoire from a very young age. The experience of performing in orquestas típicas and various ensembles, some with his father, a violinist, exposed him to a myriad of popular music genres (including Argentinian folklore), deeply influencing his career. The connection between popular and art music continued during the years he studied classical piano, harmony and composition in Rosario, where his activities as a tango pianist for composer and bandoneonist Domingo Federico1 also marked a milestone in his musical life. According to Beytelmann (personal interview, April 2012): Astor Piazzolla once said that Aníbal Troilo passed down the secrets of tango music to him. I can say that the very same thing happened to me with Domingo Federico. Also because of the age difference we had . . . he had worked with the best orchestras and had a clear perception of tango. Having settled in Buenos Aires in 1968, Beytelmann worked as a pianist in jazz ensembles and in a variety of record productions, as an arranger for rock bands and as a composer for films. While in Buenos Aires, he studied composition with Francisco Kröpfl,2 which greatly enriched his experiences with popular music and led him towards developing a more unique, personal voice. His relation with Kröpfl stimulated him to further develop an elaborate study of rhythm and accentuation, both being central characteristics of Beytelmann’s music that, in Buch’s words, ‘seems to be always in a state of dialectic tension between a metric conception and an agogic or dynamic conception of accentuation’ (2012, p. 156). But it was in Paris, his place of residence since 1976 due to authoritarian and military governments in Argentina, that his relationship with tango deepened and began to become central to his work. Tango helped further to define his aesthetics, ‘despite’ his academic background. As Beytelmann himself explained (personal interview, June 2011): I had prepared myself for being a composer and for nothing else. Though I had the métier – I knew how to write for films, I wrote arrangements for commercial music, rock, I knew these well – I was prepared to be a composer in the social sense of the term ‘composer’ [of Western art music]. I went through a period, not of crisis proper, but of much perplexity over what came from inside of me

Gustavo Beytelmann 169 [tango]; the situation put me in an awkward position, as it did not correspond to what I had hoped for myself, the image I had of myself. It took me a while to synthesize both what I expected from myself and what comes to me from ‘within’. Those two elements guided my life somehow into the direction it has taken until today, that is, how to make one out of two, not two out of one, which is rather what I do in the music that I conceive; it’s kind of a synthesis, or an end point, through which two sources merge and become one. At this point my music is my own music rather than the result of putting heterogeneous elements together. Today things are so fused that I am that. You have to resign yourself to that which you are. My job was that. As Borges says: the duty of each is to find their voice within language. I think I’ve found mine, but I worked for it. From a plural I, I tried to make a singular I; that’s my story in a nutshell. In 1977 Beytelmann participated in the European tour of Astor Piazzolla’s octet, and in the same year, he founded ensemble Tiempo Argentino along with other Argentinian musicians, within which he would move toward an important stage of his composing career. The ensemble – which lasted until 1979 – was made up of Juan José Mosalini on bandoneon, Tomás Gubitsch on guitar, Enzo Gieco on transverse flute, Jacques Paris on drums, Francis Le Guern on double bass and electric bass, singer Néstor Gabetta and Gustavo Beytelmann as composer, arranger, pianist and musical director. Tango rojo, the only album they recorded, shows the composer’s close relationship with diverse popular genres, particularly with jazz. A text accompanying the album, written by celebrated writer Julio Cortázar, clarifies some of its particular characteristics while providing an overview of the political situation in Argentina at the time: When horror forces men to abandon their homeland, poetry and music depart with them; nobody will be surprised to see how numerous Argentinian artists are in Europe today. For them, one of their few joys is to give away whatever they have, and musicians of Tiempo Argentino give tango away as those who confess their longing while they reassure their hope in a bright future back home. This music is nurtured by old popular roots, and at the same time breaks worn out moulds, venturing into beautiful, surprising sonorous fields. What is sung here helps denounce and repudiate the oppression that hits our country, and this way of conceiving and making use of tango transforms the genre and projects it to new paths. Behind all this, invariable and faithful, the rhythm of Buenos Aires beats as a heart that cannot be changed by anyone or anything, as its name is the People. (Buch 2012, p. 163) Beytelmann’s unequivocal embracing of tango is best perceived in pieces composed for the Mosalini-Beytelmann-Caratini trio. According to musicologist Ramón Pelinsky (2000, p. 51), in this ensemble the careers of its musicians seem to complement each other, as the three musical traditions that have most contributed to nomad tango come together: tango porteño (Mosalini), contemporary Western art music (Beytelmann) and jazz (Caratini). They recorded three albums: La bordona (1983), Imágenes (1987) and Violento (1988), released by Label Blue (Amiens, France). In them, arrangements from traditional tangos including La bordona (analyzed in this

170

Gustavo Beytelmann

chapter) and La cumparsita are true avant-garde re-creations and pointedly exhibit features of the language Beytelmann would develop later in life. As for the impact they had, not only in the spheres of art music and jazz, but also among the tango circles of musicians in Buenos Aires, we turn to Pugliese’s comment after attending a concert by the trio in 1986: ‘You have reached the city centre, and we have stayed in the neighbourhoods’, referring to the modernity and innovation of the music he had just listened to.3 In 2005, with the same line-up, but now with Roberto Tormo on the double bass and under the name of The Gustavo Beytelmann Trio, he recorded the album Tango a la Duke, a unique fusion of tango and jazz described on the CD back as ‘music by Duke Ellington con ritmo de tango [with tango rhythm]’. In personal interviews I conducted in 2008, great tango masters praised Beytelmann (Varassi Pega 2009). Thus, Leopoldo Federico4 pointed out: ‘Beytelmann writes like hell. I first knew his work through Mosalini, when they had a trio with Caratini, so good!’ Moreover, Atilio Stampone5 called him ‘a great arranger, a truly great arranger’, and composers of later generations, such as Pablo Mainetti, consider him a primary influence: ‘For writing tango, I learnt from Stravinsky, Bach, Beethoven, Miles Davis, Beytelmann, Boulez, Troilo, Pugliese, Arolas, Mederos, Marconi, and the list goes on’. Parallel to his activities as a performer, Beytelmann has composed pieces in the Western art, jazz and popular genres. From 1993 on, he intensified his composing and teaching work, and his music has been regularly performed in Europe and, somewhat later, Argentina. Beytelmann was Composer in Residence in Dijon (1995–1998) and Guebwiller (2002–2003), France, and in Moritzburg (2008), Germany. He was invited by Seattle University and Bellingham University to give master classes regarding his music (2002) and by the Académie de Musique in Monaco to give master classes (from 2005). He was invited as well to perform in the Tango Festival of the city of Buenos Aires. Also in Buenos Aires, in 2004, he gave a solo piano recital at Teatro Colón. During the last several years he has frequently performed in different line-ups, mostly within Europe and in Argentina (Centro Cultural Kirchner in Buenos Aires, among others). Beytelmann’s works serve as an example of how tango can function as a truly inspiring idiom for contemporary music, not a concession to popular music made by cultivated composers from time to time, but an element that can inject new ideas into the universe of classical tradition (Monjeau 2011). In turn, his ‘tangos’ display a wide array of elements and techniques distilled from his broad musical experiences, which provide his music with a unique palette of sonorities and compositional possibilities. A good example of this ‘plural I, transformed into a singular I’ is Beytelmann’s set of compositions recorded in the CD An Argentinian at the Louvre in 2001: twelve pieces6 inspired by his favourite artworks at the iconic French museum, representing the integration of his Argentinian roots and his adopted home. The integration of diverse musical traditions is also evident in the variety of instrumentations Beytelmann uses for his works, including his own trio of violin, clarinet/bass clarinet and piano, string orchestra with percussion (timpani and vibraphone), string quartet, saxophone quartet, and the use of rather atypical instruments for tango, such as vibraphone,7 trombone, oboe and oboe d’amore, horn, bassoon, trumpet, sax and accordion.8 Beytelmann’s

Gustavo Beytelmann 171 activities as a composer go beyond creating music for his own ensembles, as is common in the tango world since its beginnings up to contemporary times. Many of the pieces he composes are commissioned by established professional ensembles or soloists in search of new, original repertoire, an experience shared by many composers of Western art music. Yet, this forms an exception to the common tango tradition of commissioning arrangements but not new compositions. Besides having composed contemporary music, tango, jazz and jazz-rock, and creating arrangements for rock musicians, he has produced works for radio and television as well as Argentinian, Italian, French and German films. Additionally, he served as the artistic director of a recording company and vice president of SADEM (Sindicato Argentino de Músicos) [Argentinian Musicians Union], and as a political activist. Since 1996 he has been the artistic director of the Tango Department of Codarts University of the Arts, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Analysis of works In order to offer insight into the main characteristics of Beytelmann’s language, this chapter presents the analysis of three pieces composed by him and one representative arrangement by him for the Mosalini-Beytelmann-Caratini trio: • • • •

Otras voces, composed by Beytelmann Encuentro, composed by Beytelmann Preludio n. 1, composed by Beytelmann La bordona, composed by Emilio Balcarce, arranged by Beytelmann

The most salient features found in these pieces and typical of Beytelmann’s language (described in detail at the end of this chapter) are: the organization and characterization of formal structures through atypical features such as texture or interval classes (with phrases that are often interweaved and/or asymmetrical, incorporating the superimposition of thematic materials from different formal sections); a high level of rhythmical instability and complexity, including dynamic accents that do not form patterns; the use of mixed meters, polyrhythm and the fragmentation of the rhythmical accompaniment; the expansion of the typical use of harmony in tango (through polytonality, tonal centres that do not set clear tonalities and more frequent modulations); the implementation of changes in a gradual manner within all parameters and of unifying processes that progress throughout multiple phrases and formal sections; the use of thematic generalization; the expanded use of texture, instrumental densities, register and instrumentation; the use of variation techniques inherited from Western art music (permutation, inversion, modulation, extension, rhythmical augmentation and diminution, progressive variations); the expanded use of counterpoint (with frequent imitative passages) and the interplay between background and foreground layers already seen in previous chapters. Beytelmann’s music shares a common feature with the work of the other musicians studied in this volume: keeping one parameter stable while other parameters are modified. His pieces are generally very challenging, as they present a high level of complexity and technical difficulties both for the individual instrumentalist as well as for the whole ensemble. His use of concepts to shape his

172

Gustavo Beytelmann

compositions and arrangements is an innovation in terms of compositional strategies used within the field of traditional tango music.

Otras voces Music by Gustavo Beytelmann, 2006 Manuscript reproduced by kind permission of the composer Recorded by Quatour Caliente on the CD Encuentro. Obras de Astor Piazzolla – Gustavo Beytelmann for the record company Aeon, AECD 1107, Paris, France, 2011. Gilberto Pereyra, bandoneon; Michel Berrier, violin; Cédric Lorel, piano; Nicolas Marty, double bass and Vincent Maillard, vibraphone. Duration: 8′51″ This analysis is based on the (unpublished) original manuscript given to me by Beytelmann himself, interviews with him9 and the previously mentioned recording. Otras voces is a piece composed for an atypical quintet: bandoneon, violin, piano, double bass and vibraphone. It is constructed primarily with two elements: first, with distinctive features of the tango language reorganized in an innovative way and, second, with materials alien to its tradition. In this way, through dismantling the typical construction of tango and using many of its characteristic elements freely, Beytelmann creates a new syntax: I disassemble the toy and reassemble the pieces and thus find a huge garden at hand, which I use in a creative, personal way, giving life to new universes. Moreover, as these elements tend to maintain their main features, the resulting new universes are closely linked to the original model [tango]. In fact, along with materials and techniques derived from Western art music, the piece presents many tango characteristics: •

•

• • • •

Tango’s typical use of solos and phrasing: Beytelmann writes fraseo for the bandoneon solo as is generally done in traditional tango scores (in section B′ of the piece). Every instrument in the ensemble performs a solo, which seems to expand upon a main feature of the tango language and connects to the concept of a ‘group of soloists’ introduced in previous chapters. Traditional timbral and percussive effects: several effects from the tango tradition are used, such as chicharra, látigo (marked whip in the score) and glissando for the violin; strappata and arrastres in the double bass; arrastres, campanitas in the piano. Connecting passages in the piano: usually fills or chromatically ascending upbeat figures in the low register. Ostinatos in the Piazzolla style. Grace notes: typical tango grace notes are used, such as passing and neighbour notes, upbeat figures and acciaccaturas. Effects that alter or weaken the 4/4 meter: syncopated rhythms, upbeat figures and dynamic accents that suppress the establishment of clear patterns.

Gustavo Beytelmann 173 Beytelmann considers this work to be ‘another way of talking about the same thing, and not a different music; there is a translation, as there is a model [tango]’, hence the title of the piece [Other voices]. Furthermore, Beytelmann builds on the trend within instrumental music, instigated by Salgán and Piazzolla, of writing pieces tailor-made for and performed by an ensemble of soloists, a clear line of development in the renewal of tango music. In tango, the steady beat and the rhythmical organization are fundamental aspects around which the other structural elements are organized. In Otras voces, however, the beat is not steady. Here it is just one more element that comes and goes, and through which Beytelmann brings the genre ‘in and out of focus’.10 In some sections he utilizes an implicit beat, a compositional tactic inspired by trends in twentieth century Western art music found in certain pieces – by Ligeti and Webern, for example – in which a discernible stable rhythmical beat is lacking. In other sections, he uses an explicit beat, derived from the tango tradition. These two techniques are executed incrementally, which the composer defines as ‘beat modulation’, pulling the work towards one language or another: ‘the steady pacing is desired, and precisely because of its strong link to tango it is whisked away in certain moments of the piece’. Figure 7.1 shows the formal structure of Otras voces and the described beat modulation: the darker shades correspond to moments of explicit beat; the lighter shades correspond to moments of implicit beat; and the shades in between reveal the transition from one to the other. This calculated expression of the beat is a technique often used throughout formal sections to further elaborate their boundaries. In order to ‘blur’ the steady beat, Beytelmann uses both polyrhythm and mixed meters. In this way he achieves a high level of rhythmical instability and complexity despite employing only a limited number of rhythmical values and dynamic accents that do not form patterns (Figure 7.2). Throughout the moments of explicit beat we can find rhythms and marcatos that are typical of the tango language (Figure 7.3). Another salient feature of Otras voces is contrapuntal motion within one textural layer, which, in addition to animating the texture, is used to enact changes in instrumentation and register. The melodic lines usually move in contrary motion, while instrumental density is carefully structured. Beytelmann composes with an organic succession of materials. His materials are organized, always in a carefully crafted manner, through register, connecting passages, overlapping instrumentation, pedal points and melodic similarity. This helps to create smooth transitions between different elements and leads to a kind of fluency that clearly deviates from the usage of sudden changes typical of traditional tango music. By employing these techniques, Beytelmann makes audible his view that in tango, ‘in order to guarantee change, you have to guarantee continuity, and in order to guarantee continuity, you have to guarantee change’. Figures 7.4 and 7.5 exemplify these observations, which are described in the following paragraphs. In bars 14 and 15 (Figure 7.4) the homorhythmical passage performed by vibraphone, bandoneon, piano and double bass is a clear example of contrary melodic motion: the vibraphone and piano lines ascend; the double bass line descends; and the bandoneon line zigzags, though in a generally ascending manner. The

Figure 7.1 Formal scheme of Otras voces, with indication of ‘beat modulation’, number of bars in each section, main features and timings

174 Gustavo Beytelmann

Gustavo Beytelmann 175

Figure 7.2 Beginning of b2′, bars 141–142 (in 4/4), [06:25–06:30]

predominant motion is therefore ascending, enriched with scattered incidents of descending motion by the bandoneon and the contrasting descending motion by the double bass, resulting in an ornate texture. This compact block, arranged in such a way, reveals a threefold function: • • •

it leads to the high register, where a new melodic line will appear; it bridges the registral gap between the homorhythmical passage and the subsequent violin solo; and it smooths the transition in instrumental density.

Figure 7.3 Tango rhythms and marcatos used in Otras voces

176 Gustavo Beytelmann

Gustavo Beytelmann 177

Figure 7.4 Contrapuntal motion in bars 14–18 [00:28–00:38]

In bar 16 the bandoneon maintains a pedal note on E♭ (Figure 7.4), which is used to interweave the homorhythmical segment with the violin solo. In this same bar the violin line descends an octave in the last two eighth notes and bridges the registral gap leading to the vibraphone line, which then moves towards the low register, where the double bass enters in homorhythm. This generally descending motion compensates for the ascending motion in the previous bars. In bar 19 (Figure 7.5) the double bass again begins to ascend. In bar 20 the violin plays in its low register and, together with the double bass (again in a homorhythmical passage), they ascend and lead to bar 21 (Figure 7.5). There, the rest of the instruments join in, and the registral gap between the violin and the double bass is filled. The formal structure Otras voces is made up of five sections (A, B, C, B′, A′) that are mainly characterized by their unique textures: A is essentially homorhythmical homophony; B is melody and accompaniment; and C is polyphony. In this piece, the alternation between varied textures plays a formal role similar to what in traditional tango is fulfilled by the passage from a major to a minor tonality (or vice versa) and by thematic differentiation (A, B and C presenting contrasting themes and characters). Moreover, the tripartite form characteristic of the early tangos (A, B, C) is now elaborated into a symmetrical arrangement (A, B, C, B′, A′). This symmetrical treatment of formal sections was also used by Horacio Salgán in Don Agustín Bardi (analyzed in Chapter 5). Each section is divided into more sub-sections than is usual in tango music (Figure 7.1), and these sub-sections are organized in irregular phrases mainly

178

Gustavo Beytelmann

Figure 7.5 Register arrangement in bars 19–21 [00:38–00:44]

defined by the predominance of certain interval classes. The systematic use of intervals, both harmonically and melodically, is inspired by Schoenberg’s technique of thematic unification.11 Within Beytelmann’s compositional approach, this technique defines, to a great extent, the sonority of each section and the resulting harmonic fields. Even though a precise tonality is not established, each harmonic field still contains a pitch functioning as ‘tonic’. This further demonstrates the connections between Otras voces and tango music, which is predominantly tonal. In addition, movement through the harmonic fields is usually gradual, as can be observed in other compositional aspects of Beytelmann’s music. Section A (from bar 1 to bar 37), [00:00–01:16]: homorhythmical homophony ‘with deviations’ Beytelmann defines this section as a ‘homophony with deviations, sort of slips’ because the homophony is not total or permanent, but the elements are mainly

Gustavo Beytelmann 179 arranged in homorhythmical blocks, at times homophonic and at times polyphonic. Homophony and polyphony interfere with each other. This first section is based on instrumental blocks that present discontinuous rhythmical figures. The steady beat is implicit and therefore not typical of tango, but the instrumentation used is traditional, featuring tutti fragments in alternation with soloistic fragments. Some examples in the tango repertoire featuring an implicit beat with no clear marcato (only in short fragments and never as part of the compositional concept) are the beginnings of Si sos brujo, Taconeando and Recuerdo, as performed by Pugliese’s orchestra, and the version of A fuego lento by Salgán. Both artists have significantly influenced Beytelmann. The phrases in this section are irregular in length and develop materials through progressive variations in which almost no materials are literally repeated and clear patterns are never established. a1 (from bar 1 to bar 9), [00:00–00:20]: E is the central note, and thirds and sixths (major and minor, harmonically and melodically) are the main intervals. a2 (from bar 10 to bar 17), [00:20–00:36]: in this phrase the melodic line is divided between the violin and a homorhythmical passage in the bandoneon and the vibraphone; the interval of a perfect fourth is introduced. a3 (from bar 18 to bar 29), [00:36–00:58]: here there occurs a rise in both the rhythmical activity and the deviations from the general homorhythm, while the interval of a fourth is further emphasized. In the fourth bar of this sub-section, all instruments play a homorhythmical passage – which might be based on Alexander Scriabin’s ‘mystic’ (or ‘Prometheus’) chord – in order to stress the main texture of section A. a4 (from bar 30 to bar 37), [00:58–01:16]: this phrase distinguishes itself by the predominance of the perfect fourth and by f dynamics. It ends with a homorhythmical passage of great instrumental density performed by all the instruments except for the vibraphone, which is saved for the following phrase. This phrase further utilizes the prevailing texture of section A while leading to section B, which is constructed around a vibraphone solo that introduces the new texture of melody and accompaniment. Section B (from bar 38 to bar 80), [01:16–03:04]: melody and accompaniment In this section, the beat gradually becomes explicit over a series of instrumental solos with accompaniment, ending with the classic tango marcato. This section contains the highest instrumental density and the widest tessitura as well as the tightest relation to tango music found in the entire piece. b1 (from bar 38 to bar 44), [01:16–01:34]: this phrase presents a vibraphone solo accompanied by a harmonic background played by the violin, the bandoneon and the double bass. Rhythm and texture are simple, and the explicit beat begins to emerge. The intervals of an augmented fourth, a perfect fourth and a fifth are introduced. b2 (from bar 45 to bar 51), [01:34–01:53]: the violin plays a solo. Instrumental density increases as the piano joins the harmonic background and the register is expanded; ‘modulation’ continues towards an explicit beat, while no specific intervals are emphasized. b3 (from bar 52 to bar 56), [01:53–02:06]: the bandoneon plays a solo while the processes of b2 continue.

180

Gustavo Beytelmann

b4 (from bar 57 to bar 70), [02:06–02:39]: a rhythmical base establishes the explicit beat in 4/4 with a marcato typical of Arolas in his La cachila (Figure 7.3). The violin and the bandoneon’s left hand play a discontinuous melodic line independent from the marcato. A clear increase in instrumental density occurs. b5 (from bar 71 to bar 80), [02:39–03:04]: finally, in this phrase an unmistakable tango accompaniment in 4/4 is established while the bandoneon and the right hand of the piano play rhythmical variations within this marcato. The violin and the vibraphone perform a variety of figures that are independent from the accompanying base. The climax of the piece is therefore reached by means of the more explicit, tango-related materials. Section C (from bar 81 to bar 130), [03:04–06:01]: polyphony This central section contrasts with the previous one: polyphony is established and instrumental density decreases dramatically, while the marcato is again ‘blurred’ and the explicit beat suddenly vanishes. This section also gradually leads to the return of section B: different textural layers are added incrementally in order to establish a rhythm that foreshadows the fully explicit beat at the recapitulation of section B (B′). c1 (from bar 81 to bar 91), [03:04–03:42]: there is a dramatic, sudden decrease in instrumental density as the tutti of b5 leads to the double bass solo in this phrase. For the first and only time, the double bass is heard soloistically, which further affirms the concept of tango chamber music as composed for an ensemble of soloists. In the background, a B from the previous segment is held by the bandoneon, helping to link phrases b5 and c1. The main pitches used in the various melodic lines throughout section C are presented here. Fourths, fifths and seconds are established as the primary intervals. c2 (from bar 92 to bar 101), [03:42–04:31]: here polyphony returns, now structured around the pitches presented in c1. Instrumental density increases slowly as more layers are gradually added. Major and minor seconds prevail. c3 (from bar 102 to bar 114), [04:31–05:16]: the processes started in c2 continue in this phrase, but the intervallic structure becomes undifferentiated, as no specific intervals are emphasized. A self-referential quote is inserted at the end of this section from The Turkish Bath (Le bain turc), recorded on the CD An Argentinian at the Louvre (2001). c4 (from bar 115 to bar 130), [05:16–06:01]: this phrase presents a written piano cadenza based mainly on fourths. It is the only phrase in the piece realized in its entirety by a single instrument, which creates a great contrast with the following section (B′). Moreover, the frequent use of sixths, the explicit beat and the register all connect to B′. Section B′ (from bar 131 to bar 157), [06:01–07:06] In this section, B is recapitulated with fewer phrases while presenting some typical elements of tango. In section B′ the solos do not align with the formal structure, as opposed to section B, where the sub-sections are clearly demarcated by solos. This constitutes an exception to the traditional treatment of instrumentation in relation to the formal structure. There are typical tango moments with an explicit

Gustavo Beytelmann 181 beat, however, unlike section B, which ends with a purely explicit beat, in section B′ the most explicit marcato occurs towards the middle of the section and then becomes unsteady in order to lead to the implicit beat of section A′. Section A′ (from bar 158 to bar 197), [07:06–08:32] In this section, A is recapitulated with minor variations: bars are added or removed; changes in instrumentation occur; and some passages now contain transposed pitches. Towards the end of section A′ the violin is used to create a bridge to the Coda. Coda (from bar 198 to bar 201), [08:32–08:51] The Coda begins with an almost completely homorhythmical passage doubled in various octaves, recalling the beginning of the piece and affirming the formal symmetry of this composition. Thematic relations Thematic relations are not evident in Otras voces: specific intervals are used melodically in order to create fragmented lines evoking the language of tango. However, although there are always at least two layers, the exception being section B, they are hardly perceived as a melody with accompaniment, and thus diverge from one of the main characteristics of tango music. Figure 7.6 shows the many thematic relations between the different melodic lines. The main pitches and intervals used in these melodic lines occur in the opening phrase of the piece (transcribed in the first staff). The outer notes of the melodic profile of a1 prioritize interval classes 3 and 4, and – as is typical of tango music – the intervals are often reached by stepwise motion. C♯ and F (marked with arrowheads) indicate the

Figure 7.6 Thematic relations

182

Gustavo Beytelmann

range of the melody until the last two notes. These intervals are followed by three ascending steps of a second (inside the rounded rectangles). The phrase ends with an interval of a descending major second (inside the square rectangles). The use of these materials within the other lines, despite some variations, is clearly recognizable. The instrumental solos in section B (transcribed in the second, third and fourth staves of Figure 7.6) demonstrate Beytelmann’s constant, varied reuse of materials.

Encuentro Music by Gustavo Beytelmann, 1999 Copyright © 1999 Tonos Musikverlags GmbH, Darmstadt. Ed. No. 22004, ISMN: M-2015–5074–9 Reproduced by kind permission of Tonos Musikverlags GmbH, Darmstadt Recorded by the Mosalini-Agri Quintet for the record company Label Bleu, Paris, France, 1996. Juan José Mosalini, bandoneon; Antonio Agri, violin; Osvaldo Caló, piano; Leonardo Sánchez, guitar and Roberto Tormo, double bass Duration: 9′38″ Encuentro is a ‘laboratory’ piece in which Beytelmann explored new techniques for the tango tradition that he would later apply to other works, for instance Otras voces (also analyzed in this chapter). Among Encuentro’s many innovative features, the most outstanding is that formal segmentation is not necessarily based on thematic, but rather on textural, contrasts. This enables techniques such as a ‘textural recapitulation’, where the theme is not restated explicitly. Its formal structure is mainly articulated by three solos for the string instruments: the first, by the double bass, closes the first section of the piece (bars 48–71); the second, by the violin, opens the second section (bars 72–102); and the last, by the guitar, is a clear-cut cadenza that leads to the end of the piece. The originality of this form does not lie in the timbral and textural contrasts implied by the typical alternation between solo playing and group instrumentation in tango music, but rather in the formal and structural roles these solos play. According to Beytelmann, this decision was also influenced by the quality of the interpreters of the piece: ‘Considering that [violinist] Antonio Agri was playing, not writing a solo for him was out of the question’. The guitar solo was created especially for Leonardo Sánchez, a superb guitar player who later recorded the piece. Thus, both the contribution by the musicians of the Mosalini-Agri quintet and Beytelmann’s experience as a performer are of fundamental importance in Encuentro. As seen in the chapter focused on Piazzolla, this new method of writing that conceives of the ensemble as soloists – in which composers create the piece based on the strengths of the musicians who will play it – is characteristic of smaller ensembles (unlike orquestas típicas) and of the development of instrumental tango. Another major idea of Encuentro was to create a melodic line from which the materials of the whole piece derive. In this analysis I will refer to it as the ‘theme’, although it does not correspond to the formal characteristics of a theme as specified in Chapter 2 (in the section on stylistic norms). This theme, 14 bars long,

Gustavo Beytelmann 183 introduces another characteristic feature of Beytelmann’s music: the frequent use of asymmetrical phrases longer than the usual eight bars. Additionally, the tonal rhythm is accelerated (the piece features six different tonalities and eight modulations), with modulations most often leading to foreign tonalities. Although these characteristics are innovative aspects in relation to the traditional model, the overall sense of the piece remains close to the language of tango. Figure 7.7 on the companion website shows the formal scheme of the piece and the main characteristics of each section. Section A (from bar 1 to bar 71), [00:00–02:39] The opening melodic line – whose rhythms and intervals are manipulated in a variety of ways throughout the piece – presents the primary materials of Encuentro. The line’s melodic and rhythmical profile and its first presentation by the bandoneon give it a strong tango-like connotation. From the very beginning, Encuentro establishes an intimate relationship with tango, although the development of the piece is only slightly traditional in its realization. Figure 7.8 on the companion website shows the bandoneon opening line with an indication of its main features (described in the following paragraphs). In the first bar, the melodic line (bandoneon) presents a heavily ornamented tonic triad of A minor and, in the second, a similar treatment of the dominant chord. The ornamentation consists of turns, upper and lower neighbours, passing tones and grace notes (Figure 7.8). The opening segment of the melody outlines a minor sixth from A to F, which is then gradually compressed each time the melody changes direction. If we consider the initial A as structural note (without the turn) and the accented F as arrival tone (bar 1), we obtain the interval of a minor sixth that will be used repeatedly in the rest of the piece (indicated in Figure 7.8 on the companion website with a green oval). A set of decreasing intervals is thus established, departing from the previously mentioned minor sixth (ascending), followed by a diminished fifth (F–B, descending) and a further compression of the interval span to a minor third (B–D, ascending, and D–B, descending) and finally to a minor second (B–C, ascending, final green oval in Figure 7.8). The theme – based on chord tones with grace notes – is closely linked to the tango tradition and, in fact, there exist numerous pieces with comparable features. Among them are Boedo composed by Julio De Caro (analyzed in Chapter 3) and two pieces composed by Horacio Salgán (whom Beytelmann mentions as a major influence) that have similar beginnings: A fuego lento and Don Agustín Bardi (the latter analyzed in Chapter 5 on Salgán’s music). Don Agustín Bardi (Figure 7.9 on the companion website) also begins with a turn (on D, of its tonality, G minor) and continues with intervals similar to the ones in Encuentro. The crucial difference lies in the continuation of both lines: in the case of Salgán, a typical tango theme is developed based on the repetition of the motive in the first two bars; in Beytelmann’s case, the line is developed freely through a progressive variation that never literally recalls thematic materials – an established main feature of his works (Figure 7.8). When comparing Figures 7.8 and 7.9 on the companion website, the radical difference between traditional structures based on motives and Beytelmann’s innovative way of organizing materials and phrases becomes clear.

184

Gustavo Beytelmann

In the first phrase of Encuentro (a1, bars 1–14), [00:00–00:29], the bandoneon presents the main line while the guitar accompanies in free counterpoint. As the remaining instruments are gradually introduced, there occurs an increase in instrumental density by accumulation, a device often used by Beytelmann. During the first phrase (a1) by the bandoneon and the guitar, the violin enters in bar 12 (three bars before a2, beginning at bar 15, in which it restates the main theme), [00:29– 01:05], and the piano and the double bass finally enter together in bar 23, again in anticipation of the next phrase, a3 (beginning at bar 32), [01:05–01:38]. In this way, Beytelmann expands the usual clear-cut alignment of instrumentation to the formal structure, so typical of traditional tango, and ensures that phrases are interwoven. Another unique feature of the melodic line is that it begins with an eighth rest and ends by modulating a descending major second each time. This sequence of modulations helps to further demarcate the sub-sections: a1 in A minor, a2 in G minor and a3 in F minor. Thus, the initial ascending scale of the theme (A, B, C, D, E, F) is compensated for by the descending pattern formed by the different tonalities used (A minor, G minor, F minor). In a2 the violin restates the theme of a1 in G minor (Figure 7.10 on the companion website). To conclude a2, five additional bars (27–31) are used to present the first homorhythmical passage of the piece: a set of dotted quarter notes at a distance of a perfect fifth (interval class 5), foreshadowing the textural change from polyphony (section A) to melody with accompaniment (section B). The following sub-section, a3, is also part of this process of textural change and deviates from the previous ones: the melodic lines are here organized into three distinct textural layers with an accompanying marcato in 4. The reutilization of materials from the original theme in a3 can be observed in Figure 7.11 on the companion website (same indications as in previous figures). At the end of a3 (bar 47), a tutti performed in unison clearly marks the end of this segment and anticipates the texture of the following sub-section. a4 (the last phrase of section A), [01:38–02:07] presents the double bass solo, also based on materials of the initial theme a1. The rest of the instruments perform a homorhythmical accompaniment, thus realizing the last step towards the melody with accompaniment of section B that was hinted at in previous segments. The accompanying chords are employed as a percussive element, further emphasizing the textural change from polyphony to melody with accompaniment. As shown in Figure 7.12 on the companion website, the scale of the initial theme is re-created. The double bass line still starts with an eighth rest followed by an A, but inverts the direction (now descending), adds chromaticism and expands to now outline a minor seventh (A–B). It also outlines a minor sixth between the accented tutti chord over the bass note G and the final note B, recalling the minor sixth of the original theme. The double bass solo continues – though in a discontinuous manner – until the end of a4, which includes 10 transitional bars (62–71), [02:07–02:39], leading to section B. In this transition there is an increase in instrumental density by accumulation similar to what occurs in the beginning of the piece. Towards the end of the passage, an arpeggiated guitar line (which reappears later in the piece, fulfilling the same formal function) leads to the violin solo.

Gustavo Beytelmann 185 Section B (from bar 72 to bar 96), [02:39–04:17] This section is distinguished by the arrival of the second extensive solo for a string instrument: the violin, playing a solo with a lyricism derived from both classical and tango traditions while affirming the typical contrast between sections (rhythmical/melodic). The violin’s melodic line is even longer than the theme that opened the piece; it begins in the lower register and develops while gradually moving higher in register until section A′ to create compositional direction. Figure 7.13 on the companion website compares the beginning of this solo as notated (in the upper staff) and the transcription of Agri’s version as performed (in the lower staff). This is a clear example of tango phrasing, even though the score indicates ‘a tempo’. The melodic line is again based on the intervals of the initial theme. In this section there is again an increase in instrumental density by gradual accumulation. It begins with the violin alone, followed by the bandoneon joining as accompanist and, ultimately, the guitar and the double bass, joining simultaneously. Beytelmann reserves the piano for the typical tango upbeat figure (four chromatically ascending sixteenth notes in the low register) in the last bar of section B, which leads to the following section (A′). Section A′ (from bar 97 to bar 132), [04:17–05:31] The first phrase in this section (a1′), [04:17–04:42] consists of a varied restatement of the opening motive of the initial melodic line in three successive, brief solos (four bars each). This is supported by a stable accompanying marcato that is typically tango-like, ‘in the Arolas style’, and with the traditional harmonic progression I-IIV-I in D minor, the subdominant of the initial tonality of A minor. The first of these three solos is for violin and acts like an extension of the previous phrase, interweaving sections B and A′. Figure 7.14 on the companion website shows the first two bars of section A′, with an indication of the intervals derived from the original theme. In the second brief solo (bars 101–104), the piano performs a passage in sixteenth notes also derived from the initial theme, while the violin continues with a short phrase, again interweaving both segments. In the final solo (bars 105–108), the bandoneon plays the original melodic line more clearly. Contrary to the beginning of the piece, in a2′ (bars 109–118, Figure 7.15 on the companion website), [04:42–05:03], the beginning of the theme is emphasized through both a downbeat entrance and a passage in unison for the violin, bandoneon, guitar and piano right hand, with an accompaniment in 4 by the double bass and the left hand of the piano. This section (A′) gives the impression of a recapitulation through the return of the following elements: • • •

the homorhythmical tendencies of a4; the dotted quarter-note passage from bar 27, now in bar 115; the interval class 5 from bars 27–31, now in a3′ (bars 119–132, Figure 7.16 on the companion website).

Throughout a3′ (Figure 7.16 on the companion website) the head-motive of the theme is used in a varied form and repeated every two bars over a marcato in 4. In

186

Gustavo Beytelmann

turn, the density of the orchestration is expanded and then contracted, first through instrumental accumulation and then through a gradual dispersal. The end of this sub-section is demarcated with a two-bar sustained chord (bars 131–132). Thick chords in the low register hinder the precise perception of pitches, and due to their rhythmical and harmonic structure, they function as a suspense-inducing element that introduces the guitar cadenza, the third and final extensive solo by a string instrument. Section C (from bar 132 to bar 136), [05:31–06:55] The guitar cadenza begins with arpeggios of a descending perfect fourth similar to the ones used prior to the violin solo (introducing then section B). It is based on the materials of the initial melodic line and, as noted earlier, produces one of the main divisions of the piece. In addition, when the bandoneon enters in bar 137 (Figure 7.17 on the companion website) with a continuation of the A theme from the second bar on, this cadenza is suddenly perceived, in retrospect, as a long extension of the first bar of the initial theme. Bar 137 plays two key roles: it is a bridge to the recapitulation of the theme as well as an unmistakable quote of the beginning of the piece. Section A″ (from bar 137 to bar 201), [06:55–09:13] This section is clearly recapitulative: the second bar of the initial theme (bar 137) is presented with no variations, at the same pitch and by the same instrument (bandoneon) as in bar 2. The guitar and the double bass accompany with a milonga campera rhythm. However, after bar 137 there are only tiny excerpts and variations of the original melody and harmony; the theme is not restated. The main aspects of section A that return in section A″ are the contrapuntal polyphonic texture and the gradual instrumental accumulation. From this moment on, the section becomes tense and nondirectional as the structural materials of section A are reused freely in briefer, asymmetrical segments that do not constitute clear themes while leading to the end of the piece (Figure 7.18 on the companion website). From bar 164 on, Beytelmann introduces mixed meters for the first time, increasing the tension further. He uses the equivalent meters 3/4–6/8, already discussed in Chapter 6 on Piazzolla, together with others alien to the tango tradition but frequently found in his music, such as 5/4, 9/8 and 12/8. The seven bars preceding the Coda reinforce the polyphonic tissue by the superimposition of two clearly differentiated textural layers: violin, bandoneon and guitar on the one hand and piano and double bass on the other. Coda (from bar 202 to bar 207), [09:14–09:38] In the Coda, the characteristic intervals of the theme are reused. The Coda contrasts with previous sections, as it is stated in a homorhythmical full tutti that has been reached by instrumental accumulation (Figure 7.19 on the companion

Gustavo Beytelmann 187 website). To end the piece, a thematic line is performed in tutti, featuring a rhythm that is also derived from the initial theme.

Preludio n. 1 Music by Gustavo Beytelmann, 2011 Published with a different instrumentation under the title Les Archers de Darius. Copyright © 2001 Bleu Blanc Rouge except Belgium & Netherlands: Jean Kluger SA/NV Preludio n. 1 is reproduced by kind permission of Gustavo Beytelmann; and Editions Bleu Blanc Rouge and Jean Kluger SA/NV Recorded by Gustavo Beytelmann Nuevo Trío on the CD L’autre visage for the record company Milan Records, France, 2012. Gustavo Beytelmann, piano; Rémi Lemer, clarinet and Cyril Garac, violin Duration: 5′35″ Preludio n. 1 was originally the subtitle of Les Archers de Darius, a composition for bandoneon, piano and double bass released on the CD An Argentinian at the Louvre (2001) and published in the same year by Editions Bleu Blanc Rouge. In the newer version for his Gustavo Beytelmann Nuevo Trío, analyzed here, Beytelmann presents the piece with its new title (former subtitle), with slight modifications and in a different instrumentation consisting of piano, violin and clarinet (the latter a rather uncommon instrument within tango, as already discussed in Chapter 5 on Salgán). The piece was inspired by a bas-relief of glazed bricks from the ancient city of Susa at the Louvre Museum in Paris, dated around 500 BCE and depicting two symmetrical lines of soldiers. This might be why Preludio n. 1 is built upon superimposed and fragmentary tango materials of an improvisatory nature. Beytelmann refers to this piece as follows (personal communication, 8 April 2015): I subtitled it Preludio n. 1 because [the bas-relief] is of great modernity, the size, the details . . ., it really impressed me. The composition really corresponds to the musical form of a prelude that could have existed with other notes. It is an A-B to which I added some articulations: a cadenza, a transformed A, an even more transformed B, and a Coda. Beytelmann crafts the main structure of the piece using the piano, around which move the lines of the clarinet and the violin. As in many of his works, the materials given at the beginning are followed by a set of progressive variations that seldom literally recall particular motives. The phrases and sections are mainly segmented by means of textural differentiation, often using homorhythmical-parallel passages in order to contrast with the prevailing free counterpoint. The segments do not generally constitute whole themes, but rather melodic fragments that are related to one another in a variety of ways. This generates a complex, polyphonic texture – another characteristic feature of many of his compositions. To better elucidate this complex texture, the four layers (clarinet, violin, right hand of the piano and left hand of the piano) are analyzed independently here. Beytelmann compensates for

188

Gustavo Beytelmann

textural discontinuity by means of gradual processes that unify the progression of the piece, such as the registral ascent of the piano and the increase in rhythmical density of the clarinet and the violin lines throughout the first section. Lastly, as opposed to the typical two-theme structure of tango, he emphasizes other parameters such as texture, register, rhythm and articulation in order to create the formal organization of the piece. Beytelmann maintains the typical formal tango structure A-B-A′-B′-Coda but builds the sections with irregular, asymmetric phrases. In turn, the phrases have irregular, ever-changing quantities of bars – usually odd numbers – which make the segmentation unpredictable. The following analysis is based on the original manuscript given to me by Beytelmann himself (from which all figures were taken) and on the previously mentioned recording. In order to illustrate the formal structure of the piece, sections, sub-sections, bar numbers and number of bars are given in Figure 7.20 on the companion website. Section A (from bar 1 to bar 40), [00:00–01:40] In Preludio n. 1 – as in other compositions by Beytelmann – materials alien to tango coexist with elements related to it. Among the first, the use of polytonality is most prominent. As noted earlier in this book, tango has developed within the traditional tonal system. However, in this piece, many chords are superimposed and harmonies are blurred, yet their original functions can generally be perceived. This is first encountered at the beginning of the piece, where two chords a half-step apart overlap (E♭ minor and D minor). It generates perceptual ambiguity, being heard either as an unidentifiable chord or perhaps as an altered chord, in this case, E♭ minor (Maj7–9-♯11). This technique is used for the entire piece. Despite this element, the syncopation, marcatos and the heavy dynamic contrasts in articulation give Preludio n. 1 strong tango connotations. a1 (from bar 1 to bar 16), [00:00–00:35] Figure 7.21 on the companion website shows the first page of the manuscript and indicates the main aspects described. The piano presents two distinct textural layers: 1

2

The left hand displays certain features derived from the tango tradition: arrastres and variations on the rhythmical marcatos in 3–3–2, in 2, in 4 and in syncopation. Although Beytelmann uses mixed meters, these marcatos are still perceived as a strong rhythmical base in the Pugliese style. Most of the accented notes are reinforced by intervals of a perfect fifth, a device already analyzed in works written by Salgán (Don Agustín Bardi) and Piazzolla (Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi). The right hand plays chords (triads in either root position or first inversion) whose upper notes state the main melodic line, organized into asymmetrical fragments. By means of chromaticism and leaps within the interval span of a minor third, the melodic line ascends in a zigzagging manner from an A4 (bar 1) to a G5 (end of bar 12, as indicated in Figure 7.21 on the companion

Gustavo Beytelmann 189 website, with an arrow). This G5 signals the climax of a1 (bars 1–16). In the ascending passage, only one leap exceeds the aforementioned interval span: the perfect fourth just preceding the final pitch of the melody (G5), helping to emphasize it further. The clarinet and the violin perform brief, imitative, discontinuous passages in free counterpoint. The resulting discontinuity is compensated for by gradual processes that converge in bar 12: a change in register and an increase in dynamics as well as in textural and rhythmical densities. In order to further emphasize the climax, the four textural layers play in rhythmical and accentual unison for the first and only time in the whole sub-section (bar 12). Throughout a1 there is a clear general process from discontinuity to continuity. The segmentation between a1 and a2 is marked by a cadence that does not correspond to the classic chord progression but is still perceived as a dominant (first beat of bar 16, end of a1) resolving to the tonic (last eighth note of bar 16, beginning of a2) and is linked by a passage in the piano’s left hand, a characteristic gesture inherited from the tango tradition (Figure 7.21 on the companion website). a2 (from bar 17 to bar 31), [00:35–01:17] and a3 (from bar 32 to bar 40), [01:17–01:40] In order to structure the beginning of a2, Beytelmann again presents a change of texture and register: a homorhythmical-parallel tutti (in contrast with the initial free counterpoint), in which the violin and the clarinet descend to the medium-low register while the piano tessitura is expanded (right hand in the high register, left hand in the low register). This large registral distance between both hands in the piano is one of the legacies of Horacio Salgán. The melodic line of a1 is now restated in an extended and transposed variation, with a change to p dynamics. Throughout a2 and a3 the structural materials from a1 are presented in various ways: overlapped, asynchronous, extended, inverted, in imitation, in homorhythm and in free counterpoint. This leads to a feeling of progressive variation, where each fragment is a variation of the previous fragment and not of the original theme: a1. In a2, the piano becomes less prominent as all of the melodic lines present thematic materials and the texture returns to the initial free counterpoint. The counterpoint is regularly interrupted in order to highlight the climactic moments by means of materials that align in rhythmic, melodic or accentual unison (bars 37–40, Figure 7.22 on the companion website). This again demonstrates Beytelmann’s special attention to texture, which he uses to create form and character in his compositions. In addition, the superimposition of structural materials from different sections – a technique already described in Pugliese’s work – represents another main characteristic of Beytelmann’s music, observable in this Preludio n. 1. In bars 30–31 (Figure 7.23 on the companion website), for instance, he foreshadows a pianistic passage in sixteenth notes that will begin in full at bar 41, in sub-section b1

190

Gustavo Beytelmann

(described in the following paragraphs, Figure 7.26 on the companion website). Likewise, bar 27 of section A (Figure 7.24 on the companion website) foreshadows bars 43–44 of section B (Figure 7.25 on the companion website). Section B (from bar 41 to bar 64), [01:40–03:11] b1 (from bar 41 to bar 57), [01:40–02:35]: this sub-section presents upbeat figures made up of small durations that always lead to longer notes (Figure 7.26 on the companion website, bars 41–46). Instrumentation again transforms in a gradual manner: either by accumulation or dispersal. As before, segments demarcated by textural changes create a sense of discontinuity (Figures 7.26 and 7.27 on the companion website): piano alone (bars 41–44) leads to a homorhythmical tutti reached by accumulation (bars 45–46), followed by polyphony (bars 47–51), homorhythmical tutti by accumulation (bar 52), polyphony (bar 53), piano alone (bar 54) and finally another homorhythmical tutti (bars 55–57). b2 (from bar 58 to bar 64), [02:35–03:11]: this sub-section acts as a transition between sections B and A′ and consists of two brief successive cadenzas (first by violin, then clarinet) that are interspersed with thematic fragments played by the piano. Then, repeating a structural pattern from previous sections, a tutti is reached through accumulation (bars 62–64) while beginning to play thematic materials of section A′ that again interweave both sections. Section A′ (from bar 65 to bar 94), [03:11–04:24] In section A′, the thematic fragments of section A are varied and permutated, treating elements as interchangeable. The first nine bars of section A are restated literally in the piano while the clarinet and the violin play varied melodic lines that reinstate the initial free counterpoint and sometimes join the melody in the right hand of the piano (bars 65–67, Figure 7.28 on the companion website). a1′ (from bar 65 to bar 79), [03:11–03:46]: this sub-section is presented in an abbreviated form, as it re-creates materials from both a1 and a2 in a single subsection. Again, the connection to the following phrase occurs through a textural change, this time from polyphony to two consecutive brief solo passages (violinclarinet, bar 78), followed by a passage where the layers align rhythmically (bar 79), both in Figure. 7.29 on the companion website. a2′ (from bar 80 to bar 94), [03:46–04:24]: in this sub-section the initial thematic material is stated for the last time. This happens in a manner similar to what took place in a2: parallel homorhythm and p dynamics. The piano’s melodic line from the two first bars of the piece returns and undergoes a sequence of short variations (Figure 7.30 on the companion website). Section B′ (from bar 95 to bar 112), [04:24–05:02] Like section B, the beginning of section B′ is again demarcated by a piano passage in sixteenth notes, here with an ascending melodic line.

Gustavo Beytelmann 191 b1′ (from bar 95 to bar 107), [04:24–04:49]: this sub-section is also distinguished by a sequence of brief fragments (often superimposed) of a melodic line divided amongst the different layers (Figure 7.31 on the companion website). The last bar of b1′ (bar 107) again presents a rhythmical-accentual unison that signals the final appearance of the theme of section B: b2′, at bar 108. b2′ (from bar 108 to bar 112), [04:49–05:02]: this sub-section restates the beginning of b1 in an abbreviated form while the instrumentation accumulates (Figure 7.32 on the companion website). Once more, a textural change fulfils a formal role: the last two bars of b2′ (bars 111–112) present a homorhythmical-parallel passage reached by accumulation that leads to the beginning of the Coda. Coda (from bar 113 to bar 124), [05:02–05:35] In the Coda the initial polyphony resumes as it presents four differentiated textural layers (Figure 7.33 on the companion website): 1 2 3 4

The left hand of the piano performs a rhythmical base. The right hand of the piano presents a line based on the melodic materials of section A. The violin plays an ostinato with three double-stops of a sixth, sometimes in accentual unison with the right hand of the piano. The clarinet maintains the sixteenth notes from the previous section (thus interweaving b2′ and the Coda) and then plays segments in accentual unison with the rest.

Finally (bar 122), a homorhythmical passage leads to the end.

La bordona Music by Emilio Balcarce, 1958 Arrangement by Gustavo Beytelmann, 1981 Copyright © by Warner/Chappell Music Argentina Reproduced by kind permission of Warner/Chappell Music Argentina and Gustavo Beytelmann Recorded by the Mosalini-Beytelmann-Caratini trio on the album La bordona, for the record company Label Bleu, Paris, France, 1981 Duration: 5′36″ La bordona is one of the most celebrated pieces in the history of tango. It is also one of the finest pieces ever written by Emilio Balcarce (1918–2011), a talented violinist, bandoneonist, orchestra leader, arranger and composer who frequently worked for the most renowned orchestras of his era (led by Aníbal Troilo, Alfredo Gobbi, Francini-Pontier, José Basso, Leopoldo Federico and Osvaldo Pugliese, among others). According to bandoneonist Nicolás Lavallén, former member of Pugliese’s orchestra, Astor Piazzolla himself once confessed that the

192

Gustavo Beytelmann

one tango he wished he would have composed was La bordona (personal communication). The piece’s title refers to the bordonas, the lowest strings of the guitar, used to play the slow and melancholic milonga campera rhythm. Originally, it consisted of a steady rhythmical-melodic base upon which sung verses were improvised; later, in instrumental music, these verses became phrased solos. Balcarce’s originality is shown by both his transformation of this rhythmical base into the main theme of the piece as well as his leaving that theme in its original register: the bass line (the bordona). The analysis of this arrangement for trio (bandoneon, piano and double bass) is based on the transcription of the manuscript given to me by Beytelmann, the 1981 recording, Balcarce’s published piano score from 1958 released by Editorial Julio Korn and the orchestral version recorded in 1958 by Aníbal Troilo’s orchestra, for whom Balcarce composed and orchestrated the piece.12 This version of La bordona (along with all the versions of traditional tangos included on the album) is a noteworthy example of the concept of re-creation in tango music and presents the main features of the language that Beytelmann would later develop in his own compositions. Although the characteristic materials of the original piece are respected and presented in a clear, recognizable way, Beytelmann pushes the boundaries that were traditionally established by formal tango features. The piece utilizes the entire tessitura of each instrument (the bandoneon in its highest octave is a main element) and demonstrates innovative features in rhythm, harmony and form. The instruments are used in a variety of textural layers and with diverse roles, clearly showing Beytelmann’s treatment of the trio as an ensemble of soloists. In addition, Beytelmann employs the three instruments as five distinct voices: double bass, bandoneon right hand, bandoneon left hand, piano right hand and piano left hand, combining them freely and scoring them in unusual and frequently varying registers. Another noteworthy aspect of this arrangement relates to the concept of tribute as discussed in the analysis of Salgán’s Homenaje a Pedro Laurenz (Chapter 5) and Piazzolla’s Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi (Chapter 6), as certain quotes to previous arrangements of the piece can be found. Examples of this are the variación written by Beytelmann for the bandoneon, which resembles that played by Julio Ahumada with the Francini-Pontier orchestra, while Beytelmann’s piano variación evokes that played by pianist Juan José Paz in the same recording (Pelinsky 2000, p. 54). Lastly, the arrangement further emphasizes the irregularity and extensive duration of the original piece’s phrases. The form and general structure of the arrangement of La bordona is presented in Figure 7.34. Section A (from bar 1 with upbeat to bar 33), [00:00–01:43] This first section presents a nearly identical melodic line compared to the original, but with significant variations in orchestration compared to the orchestral version. As we have seen in many other tango works, Beytelmann here uses the technique of keeping one musical parameter stable while modifying some of the others.

Gustavo Beytelmann 193 Section Sub-sect.

a1

A a2

No. of bars

1 11 11

12 21 10

Section Sub-sect. No. of bars

[a4] 66 71 6

a2, a3, bars 8–13 [00:24–00] 22 33 12 A

a3 72 91 10

b1

B b2

b3

34 42 9

43 52 10

53 65 13

B 92 114 23

Coda 115 118 4

Figure 7.34 Formal scheme of Beytelmann’s arrangement of La bordona

Figure 7.35 Beginning of a1, bar 1 with upbeat–3 [00:00–00:14]

a1 (from bar 1 with upbeat to bar 11), [00:00–00:38]: in this first phrase, Beytelmann uses the original E minor theme literally, although here it is phrased and slower, with a tempo more linked to the milonga campera (as in the orchestral version) than to tango. From the very beginning innovative features are introduced, which are reused later in the arrangement. As the piano plays the initial exposition of the theme (Figure 7.35), the accompaniment consists of only the bandoneon playing a harmonic background of sustained, altered chords in its highest octave. There is a significant registral distance between the bandoneon and the piano (more than five octaves). Whereas traditionally the melody would be presented in full by the piano, in bars 8–10 (Figure 7.36) the piano joins the harmonic background, and the double bass plays the melodic line without rhythmic marcato, diverging from the orchestral version in which there is a marcato in 4. a2 (from bar 12 with upbeat to bar 21), [00:38–01:12]: in this phrase the arrangement contrasts with Balcarce’s orchestral version, as the main layer is played in the rare combination of the bandoneon’s left hand and the double bass instead of the piano (Figure 7.36). The phrase ends with the three instruments performing the theme in the low register, keeping the tempo of milonga campera (unlike the marcato in the orchestral version).

194

Gustavo Beytelmann

Figure 7.36 End of a1 and beginning of a2, bars 8–13 [00:24–00:48]

Figure 7.37 comparative scheme of a3 in Troilo’s and Beytelmann’s versions [00:48–01:16 in Troilo; 01:12–01:43 in Beytelmann]

a3 (from bar 22 with upbeat to bar 33), [01:12–01:43]: this phrase is related to the orchestration in Balcarce’s version, but the rhythmical marcato and instrumentation are altered. Figure 7.37 compares the main characteristics of a3 in Balcarce-Troilo’s and Beytelmann’s versions (the bar numbers refer only to this phrase, not to the whole piece). The piano and the double bass continue the bass line accompaniment from a2, which interweaves the phrases and gives them a sense of unity (Figure 7.38). Beytelmann’s arrangement of a3 presents two outstanding features: •

•

From bar 23 onwards (Figure 7.38), the piano, the left hand of the bandoneon and the double bass perform brief imitative passages (by means of rhythmical variation and compression) of the melodic line in the bandoneon’s right hand, establishing a contrapuntal, polyphonic texture. In bar 32 (Figure 7.39), the piano anticipates the B theme (starting at bar 34), and, together with the steady base in 4 maintained until the beginning of B, interweaves both sections. This does not occur in the published piano score or in Balcarce’s orchestration.

Gustavo Beytelmann 195

Figure 7.38 Fragment of a3, bars 23–29 [01:16–01:32]

Figure 7.39 End of A and beginning of B, bars 32–35 [01:38–01:48]

196

Gustavo Beytelmann Section B (from bar 34 to bar 65), [01:43–03:21]

This section respects the rhythmical language and the tempo of the recording by Troilo’s orchestra. Thus, the typical contrast between sections is maintained, in this case: A, melodic, and B, rhythmical. b1 (from bar 34 to bar 42), [01:43–02:04]: in this phrase the B theme is presented as a phrased piano solo in the higher registers (in the Salgán style) with an improvisatory character uncommon in traditional tango, most likely reminiscent of Beytelmann’s jazz-related background (Figure 7.39). This varies from the orchestral version, as does the accompaniment, here performed by the double bass and the bandoneon. The double bass plays figures based on a similar sequence of pitches that varies rhythmically from bar to bar, while the bandoneon presents a harmonic progression that is more elaborate than that of the orchestral version. In bar 41 (Figure 7.40) the bandoneon doubles the main melody, making it thicker in

Figure 7.40 End of b1 and beginning of b2, bars 41–45 [01:59–02:10]

Gustavo Beytelmann 197 order to (again) support formal segmentation (signalling the end of b1). As is typical in Beytelmann’s works, registral changes occur gradually, in this case through a descending passage in the piano’s left hand in bar 41 (bringing the piano back to its usual registers after its solo in the higher registers), which culminates in a thematic unison passage with the double bass in bar 42 that leads to b2. This helps to make the registral change between b1 and b2 smoother (Figure 7.40). b2 (from bar 43 to bar 52), [02:04–02:40]: from this phrase onwards, the arrangement begins to differ dramatically from the orchestral version. In the orchestral version, the melodic line is distributed amongst a varying instrumentation (bandoneon alone, strings, bandoneons and then strings plus bandoneons) and performed over a steady rhythmical base. In contrast, the melodic line in Beytelmann’s arrangement is presented as a long, continuous bandoneon solo that Beytelmann invigorates by using three different rhythmical marcatos consecutively: in double syncopation at bar 44, ‘in the Arolas style’ at bar 45 and bordoneo at bar 46 (Figures 7.40 and 7.41). In bar 47, the rhythmical base reinforces the melodic line (as in the orchestral version) and – by means of a ritenuto – leads to bar 48, in which the bandoneon completes the phrase, alone, and is immediately imitated by the piano (in the added bar 49, Figure 7.41). These sudden changes in the melodic line’s instrumentation contrast with the previously continuous bandoneon solo. In the last part of the phrase, another bar is added in order to reinforce the reduction in tempo. In this segment, two previously mentioned procedures can be observed (Figure 7.42): • •

The gradual change between b2 and b3 allows for a smooth entrance of the solo bandoneon in bar 53 through a gradual reduction in instrumental density, tempo and dynamics. The elision of phrases: bar 52 is the last bar of b2, but also the first of the bandoneon solo (b3).

Figure 7.41 Fragment of b2, bars 46–49 [02:10–02:20]

198

Gustavo Beytelmann

Figure 7.42 End of b2 and beginning of b3, bars 50–53 [02:20–02:46]

b3 (from bar 53 to bar 65), [02:40–03:21]: this sub-section presents a phrased bandoneon solo divided into two semi-phrases. The first semi-phrase (bars 53–59) corresponds to the ending of section B in the original version, now expanded and varied; the second one (bars 60–65) corresponds to the return of section A played by the double bass (also varied and now transposed a semitone higher, to F minor) and the bandoneon starting a variación. There is again a gradual increase in instrumental density (the double bass joins in bar 61 and the piano in bar 66), in tempo (accelerando towards the following phrase) and in registral density (the piano enters in the registral gap between the bandoneon and the double bass). This is an example of Beytelmann’s use of thematic materials from different sections in a single phrase, which in turn helps to interweave sections B and A′.

Gustavo Beytelmann 199 Section A′ (from bar 66 to bar 91), [03:21–04:18] [a4] (from bar 66 to bar 71), [03:21–03:33]: at this point in the orchestral version Balcarce simply restates a3 and ends the piece with the typical variación on section B. In Beytelmann’s arrangement, however, new phrases from A are inserted, creating a new sub-section [a4], (Figure 7.43). Rather than a new phrase, these bars constitute a bridge reminiscent of the theme of a1, now varied and transposed to G minor. The bandoneon continues the variación from b3, tying together both phrases and leading to a3′ (starting at bar 72), while undergoing a steady increase in dynamics and tempo as well as in rhythmical, registral and textural densities. a3′ (from bar 72 to bar 91), [03:33–04:18]: in this phrase the double bass alone (again in E minor) continues with the passage of eighth notes, begun as a rhythmical base that joins the bandoneon in bar 71, yet functioning now as the main textural layer (Figure 7.43). In this way the sudden textural contrast is softened and a connection is made with the previous phrase. The eighth notes are organized in asymmetrical groups through their articulations, therefore blurring the 4/4 metric structure. From bar 74 on (Figure 7.43) an interesting effect – already identified in works by Pugliese, Salgán and Piazzolla – takes place: the

Figure 7.43 End of a4 and beginning of a3′, bars 66–74 [03:21–03:38]

200

Gustavo Beytelmann

Figure 7.44 Fragment of a3′, bars 75–78 [03:38–03:46]

Figure 7.45 Fragment of a3′, bars 82–86 [03:50–04:06]

background and the main melody are combined into a polyphonic texture. The double bass continues with its solo materials, while the piano and the bandoneon restate the theme of a3 in a high register parallel passage in rhythmical augmentation (Figure 7.44). This hierarchical ambiguity is gradually reduced until bar 82 (Figure 7.45), where the second segment of a3 is resumed in a tutti, exactly as in bar 28. In bar 86 (Figure 7.45) the double bass resumes the accompanimental eighth notes, while the bandoneon extends the phrase until the return of B, both instruments thus, once again, interweaving the two segments. As in bar 32, in bar 91 (Figure 7.46) the piano anticipates the arrival of section B′ in bar 92.

Gustavo Beytelmann 201 Section B′ (from bar 92 to bar 114), [04:18–05:11] After a tutti in bar 92 (Figure 7.46), emphasizing the beginning of the theme of section B, the bandoneon (as in Balcarce’s version) begins a variación. This variación is longer than usual and extends the original twelve-bar segment to eighteen. The double bass plays marcato in 4, while the piano alternates accompanimental, syncopated chords with thematic passages and – incidentally – joins the variación in the bandoneon (Figures 7.46 and 7.47). From bar 104, the accentual alignment of the three instruments with the meter demarcates a clear textural change. In the following bars, 107–110, the variación is performed in a parallel tutti (Figure 7.47). This clearly diverges from a common characteristic of traditional tango in which the double bass does not perform the variación but rather supports it with a steady marcato. Next comes a sequence of brief segments with a variety of textural

Figure 7.46 End of section A′ and beginning of section B′ (variación), bars 91–93 [04:16–04:23]

Figure 7.47 Fragment of B′, bars 106–108 [04:46–04:52]

202

Gustavo Beytelmann

Figure 7.48 Fragment of B′, bars 111–114 [04:56–05:13]

densities that restrain the music’s drive and lead to the Coda (Figure 7.48). The beginning of the B theme is literally restated in tutti (bar 113, Figure 7.48), and in the following bar a piano passage links to the Coda. Coda (from bar 115 to bar 118), [05:11–05:38]: the piece ends with the bordoneo from the beginning of the arrangement performed by the piano and the double bass as well as the same high register chord with which the bandoneon began the piece.

Chapter review and additional remarks The pieces composed and arranged by Beytelmann implement traditional tango features in a new way while introducing materials and techniques alien to the genre’s language. There is an intricate interplay of various forms of Western art and popular music (especially tango and jazz), by means of which they merge and emerge as a new language, bearing the composer’s signature. Beytelmann created an organic, personal oeuvre that achieves continuity between the language of tango and his own language. Finally, within his compositions, he succeeds in integrating both emotional and intellectual realms in a conscious, coherent manner. Here follows a summary of the various techniques found in the compositions and the arrangement by Beytelmann analysed in this chapter. Formal, textural and melodic features •

Segmentation and interweaving of sections and phrases: these procedures appear in a revised form in Beytelmann’s music, in which links or ruptures between contrasting sections are, structurally, more important than in traditional tango. Beytelmann preserves this established practice and develops it further by exaggerating links or breaks between sections. Often there are elements (e.g. pitches, rhythms, registers, motives) that are maintained from

Gustavo Beytelmann 203

•

•

•

•

•

one section to the next, interweaving them and making transitions more fluid. One example of this can be found in the arrangement of La bordona, where a rhythmical base becomes the main melody, a process opposite to that found in Pugliese’s arrangement of La mariposa, where the introductory main motive becomes the accompaniment in section A. Additionally, solos might not align with the formal structure: even while functioning as the distinctive element of sections and sub-sections, solos might begin earlier, in anticipation, or continue further on into a new section. This constitutes an exception to the traditional treatment of instrumentation in relation to the formal structure. The use of these techniques is systematic in Beytelmann’s music, lending his compositions a strong, natural drive. Irregular formal structures and phrases: Beytelmann’s works introduce important formal variations in relation to the tango tradition. Even when large formal structures are maintained (for example, A – B – A′ – B′ in Preludio n. 1), phrases are frequently asymmetrical and remarkably longer. In addition, phrases may also have irregular, ever-changing quantities of bars (usually odd numbers) that make segmentation unpredictable. Characterization of sections and formal segmentation through atypical features: Beytelmann often divides and distinguishes formal sections by making use of different textures. The alternation between these various textures plays a formal role, similar to the role traditionally played in tango by modulations, articulations, character, tempo and thematic contrast. This new technique allows the listener to perceive the return of sections, be it either through thematic evocation or through a ‘textural’ recapitulation (as in Encuentro), even when thematic features are not restated in full. In some cases he uses either the perception of the beat (as in Otras voces) or specific interval classes in order to differentiate phrases or sections or to define their primary harmonic fields. These changes are most often gradual or incremental, as with other parameters. Finally, a specific use of timbre is also associated with formal segmentation (as in Encuentro and Preludio n. 1). Use of intervals and brief, non-repeated motives to form melodic lines: some overarching melodic lines, while heavily fragmented, are made up of intervals and brief, non-repeated motives presented by different instruments that can even overlap. In some pieces, such as Preludio n. 1, individual motives are frequently reorganized to construct different melodic lines that remain closely related with each other, thus maintaining a sense of consistency. In other works, such as Otras voces, a limited set of intervals is used (both melodically and harmonically) to create various melodic lines. Ostinatos: the use of ostinatos was already an established element of the tango language. Beytelmann, however, employs them to realize a formal function: emphasizing climactic moments and closing sections (such as in the ending of Encuentro). Thematic generalization: the same structural materials (pitches, intervals, rhythm, articulations) are used to create different melodic lines throughout the piece, as seen in Otras voces. These lines are then presented in combinations

204

•

•

•

• •

•

•

•

• •

Gustavo Beytelmann that explore various possibilities for transformation: overlapped, out of phase, rhythmically varied, inverted, in imitation, in homorhythm and in free counterpoint. Superimposition of contrasting thematic materials from different formal sections: fragments of one section are used in subsequent ones or, conversely, materials from one section are foreshadowed in preceding sections of the piece. The composer calls this technique a ‘polyphony of ideas’. Use of texture: in contrast to the melody with accompaniment, so typical of tango, Beytelmann systematically uses polyphonic passages, including free counterpoint. The use of different kinds of textures and their continuous alternation throughout his works gives his music a much more complex structure, more connected to so-called Western art music than to the tango tradition. As with other aspects of his music, transitions between different textures often occur gradually. Motivic imitation: as part of his development of textures, in polyphonic sections Beytelmann frequently uses free imitation. Imitative materials are usually presented with slight modifications through diminution, augmentation, reduction or variation in instrumentation or rhythm. Modulating melodic lines: Beytelmann composes melodic lines that contain, as part of their design or profile, a modulating structure that differentiates formal sections, as in Encuentro. Use of register: in some works, register is employed as an independent parameter that can reinforce or work against formal segmentation or operate as a thematic element (Preludio n. 1). Furthermore, Beytelmann’s works develop the use of all available registers and the frequent expansion or contraction of the tessitura, often in a gradual manner. This procedure is complemented by textural and instrumental variations and is aimed – as are many other aspects in tango – at generating contrast and diversity. Decontextualization of tango materials: materials taken from the tango tradition are freely combined and spread over diverse formal sections, devoid of their usual connotations. This technique results in new, original figures that, nonetheless, remain closely related to the tango language. Use of ornaments: in order to reinforce the articulated character of some passages, Beytelmann uses ornamental effects and sounds from the tango tradition, including passing notes and grace notes, neighbour tones, acciaccaturas, turns, látigo, tambor and strappata. Polytonality: in works such as Preludio n. 1 and Otras voces, multiple chords are sometimes presented simultaneously. They tend to maintain their harmonic functions and are perceived as either altered or extended chords. This use of polytonality deviates from traditional tango, which is basically tonal. Altered chords: the use of bass lines featuring notes alien to the chords in the given harmony regularly provides tonal ambiguities. These bass tones usually establish melodic lines. Organization of pitches: certain scales are altered in order to characterize some passages or sections (Preludio n. 1).

Gustavo Beytelmann 205 • •

•

• •

Alignment of musical elements: this compositional strategy – typical of traditional tango – is here used to enhance climaxes by synchronizing changes in density of texture or register, dynamics, rhythm and other elements. Ambiguity between background and foreground: this occurs when a secondary line takes the forefront and the main theme is concealed, hidden or positioned as a background layer or when a countermelody is heard as the main line. This is a variation technique already highlighted in previous chapters. Use of concept: Beytelmann’s compositional process usually begins with a novel concept, which relates to materials, techniques or devices that he would like to explore. His compositions can therefore be considered ‘experimental’, since they explore new paths and are in continuous development. Pursuant to this, some new ideas put forward by the composer include the modulation between implicit and explicit beats as well as the formal segmentation through texture (Otras voces); the development of a melodic line through the use of register (Preludio n. 1); or a melodic line whose profile is of a modulating nature and whose repetition therefore delineates the formal structure and defines new tonalities (Encuentro). Piano solos: in some of his compositions he plays tango-like two-hands piano solos with a jazzy flavour. This is heard most clearly in his arrangement of La bordona. Use of quotes: as noted with Piazzolla’s Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi (Chapter 6), Beytelmann also quotes passages from earlier works, such as the piano fragment and bandoneon variación in his re-creation of La bordona.

Orchestration •

• • •

Contrapuntal motion: in addition to animating the texture, this technique is used to enact changes in instrumentation and register (as seen in Otras voces). For example, when one line ascends, this is compensated by a descent in another line. When instrumental density increases, this is compensated by a decrease in the following section (and vice versa). Beytelmann composes with an organic succession of materials that appears to be derived from certain forms of Western art music. His materials are organized by both register and connecting passages, by overlapping instrumentation, by pedal points and by melodic similarity, always in a carefully crafted manner. This helps to create smooth transitions between different elements and leads to a fluency that strongly contrasts with sudden changes that are typical of traditional tango music. Changes in instrumental density: Beytelmann often uses a sequential process of instrumentation. Through a gradual accumulation or reduction of instruments, he expands and contracts the orchestral mass. Textural rhythm: the entrances of different textural layers are organized in such a way that those instances establish a rhythm. Distribution of the melodic line: melodic lines are divided amongst different instruments, creating a sense of discontinuity. However, discontinuous

206

•

Gustavo Beytelmann musical fragments played by different instruments can be perceived as a single, timbrally fragmented melodic line. Use of instruments in unusual registers or combinations: Beytelmann expands the possibilities of instrumentation in terms of register and combinations. For instance, the bandoneon plays in its highest octave; the usual registral distance between textural layers is expanded; the double bass, together with the left hand of the bandoneon, function as a main textural layer; the clarinet, piano and violin are used in novel combinations; the vibraphone is added to a typical tango ensemble; and atypical ensembles are assembled and composed for.

Variation techniques • • •

• •

Parametric instability-stability: as already seen in previous chapters, a basic rule of tango music – found in Beytelmann’s pieces as well – is to keep one parameter stable while other parameters are modified. Application of techniques found in certain forms of Western art music: Beytelmann systematically uses variation techniques such as permutation, inversion, modulation, extension, and rhythmical augmentation and diminution. Free development of materials: Beytelmann often composes progressive variations, each new fragment being a variation of another variation and not of an original fragment. This represents a strong contrast with tango tradition, in which themes are generally organized through the repetition or combination of motives. Instead, in Beytelmann’s music, this kind of motivic construction is rarely found, and melodic and rhythmical figures usually do not repeat. Complexification of the tonal plan: Beytelmann’s pieces present more modulations than traditional tango. These include foreign tonalities in addition to the usual closely related tonalities. Unifying processes: Beytelmann utilizes gradual unifying processes that progress throughout multiple phrases and formal sections. In Preludio n. 1, for instance, he connects the various superimposed melodic lines by steadily increasing the rhythmical density, dynamics and tessitura.

Rhythm and meter •

•

Use of beat as a compositional technique: in Otras voces, Beytelmann structures some sections with an implicit beat (derived from certain forms of Western art music) and others with an explicit beat (derived from the tango tradition). He moves back and forth between the two gradually. The composer defines this process as ‘beat modulation’ and uses it primarily to draw the work closer towards or further from the traditional tango idiom. He also uses this technique to distinguish textural layers. Fragmentation of rhythmical accompaniment: in traditional tangos, rhythmical patterns in the accompanying base usually change in alignment with semiphrase, phrase or section. In Beytelmann’s music this can occur in passages

Gustavo Beytelmann 207

•

•

•

that are shorter or that do not strictly align with formal segmentation. Also, the ever-changing rhythmical figures are often organized in such a way that they do not constitute patterns. Additionally, as is the case in the ending of La bordona, accompaniments are interspersed with the typical chords of the marcato, thematic passages, fragments of the variación and new variations based on traditional marcatos, the latter also used in Preludio n. 1 and Otras voces. Mixed meters and polyrhythm: in many of Beytelmann’s works, meter is not applied in a manner commonly found in traditional tango, but emerges from the organization of pitches, rhythm, accents and articulations. He achieves a high level of rhythmical instability and complexity despite the use of only a small number of rhythmical values and through the application of dynamic accents in such a way that they do not form patterns. Both mixed meters and polyrhythm (the latter closely related to his usage of polyphonic textures) are used to dynamize the rhythmical structure, which therefore becomes unpredictable. In addition, through emphasizing, counteracting or blurring the steady pacing, he plays with the listener’s perception of the beat. In this way, Beytelmann makes his works more complex and presents an alternative to the binary organization (S-W) that is a core component of tango. Metric and accentual divergence-convergence: Beytelmann developed a finely crafted way of applying rhythm and accents. Accents are performed with a strong, percussive effect, and they may either emphasize or work against the metric structure, often giving profile to passages where the meter is no longer recognizable. Through superimposed and contrasting accentual patterns that cause the textural layers to diverge with each other, the steady beat is sometimes blurred and a more complex texture is achieved. Thickening the piano bass line: in some accompanying marcatos, Salgán reinforces accented beats by thickening the bass line of the piano’s left hand, generally with intervals of a perfect fifth or an octave. Beytelmann integrates this technique into his music in a freer manner.

Notes 1 Domingo Federico was a bandoneonist, composer, arranger and orchestra leader from Rosario, Argentina, the city where I was born and where Beytelmann spent much of his youth. My first experience with an orquesta típica was indeed with Federico. 2 Kröpfl is considered to be one of the most important Argentinian composers. He was a pioneer in electro-acoustic media in Latin America, and in 1958 he founded the Musical Phonology Studio of the University of Buenos Aires, the first institutional electronic music studio in Latin America. The catalogue of his works includes chamber music, orchestral music, electro-acoustic music and mixed music. He developed the analytical method of ‘accentual prototypes’, described by himself as a basic repertoire of accentual units, minimal sets or patterns of strong and weak associated elements, useful for describing any rhythmical complexity (Kröpfl, 2009). Beytelmann subsequently used these concepts in his works. 3 This anecdote, recalled by Beytelmann in a personal interview, appears as a quote of Mosalini in Esteban Buch’s Tangos cultos (p. 150), lightly paraphrased and spiced with

208

4

5

6 7 8 9 10

11

12

Gustavo Beytelmann

football references: ‘We kept playing in the playground, while you made it to the Premier League!’ Leopoldo Federico (1927–2014) was an orchestra leader, composer and one of the greatest tango bandoneon players ever. He played with great figures, including Juan Carlos Cobián, Alfredo Gobbi, Víctor D’Amario, Osmar Maderna, Héctor Stamponi, Mariano Mores, Carlos Di Sarli, Horacio Salgán, Alberto Marino, Atilio Stampone and Astor Piazzolla, among others. Atilio Stampone (b. 1926) is an outstanding Argentinian tango musician, piano player, arranger, orchestra leader and composer. He played in numerous ensembles with Astor Piazzolla, Julián Plaza, Juan Carlos Cobián, Pedro Maffia, Alfredo Marcucci and Mariano Mores, among others. In 2000 he was appointed musical director of the Juan de Dios Filiberto National Orchestra of Argentinian Music. Preludio n. 1, analyzed in this chapter, consists of a different instrumentation of The Archers of Darius, one of the twelve pieces included in this CD. This instrument had been previously introduced, in other combinations, into the world of tango by Osvaldo Fresedo and Astor Piazzolla. A complete list of Beytelmann’s published compositions, including publisher and instrumentation, can be found at his website, www.gustavobeytelmann.com [Accessed 30 December 2018]. Unless otherwise specified, all the quotes from Beytelmann included in this volume derive from my extensive work with the composer during the last twelve years. In his presentation ‘Presencia del tango en la obra de Julio Viera’ (2011), Federico Monjeau uses this enlightening metaphor when referring to Serenatas a la luna by Julio Viera (2005): the composer ‘brings in and out of focus the typical elements of tango’ as if looking through a camera that allows one to see more or less clearly the object in question. A noteworthy example of this technique are Schoenberg’s Three Piano Pieces Op. 11 (‘Drei Klavierstücke’, Op. 11, 1909) with the three first pitches including the interval classes used most often in the piece (1, 3 and 4) to shape melodic and harmonic material. Aníbal Troilo for Export, Vol. 1, for the record company BMG, 1990.

8

Mendizábal’s El entrerriano – comparative analysis of arrangements by Pugliese, Salgán and Piazzolla Bárbara Varassi Pega

Music by Rosendo Mendizábal, 1897 (public domain) Arrangements by Horacio Salgán, Osvaldo Pugliese and Astor Piazzolla This chapter deals with three unique arrangements of Rosendo Mendizábal’s El entrerriano by Salgán, Pugliese and Piazzolla. A comparative analysis of their

210

Mendizábal’s El entrerriano

main features serves to highlight and further exemplify many characteristics of these musicians’ styles as well as shedding light on two significant aspects: •

•

How each arrangement relates to the original tango. This allows for a better understanding of how its main features were re-created, how its materials were organized, how accompanimental models were defined and how orchestration, texture and formal parameters were established. How the arrangements relate to each other in terms of common features, differences and peculiarities.

In order to illustrate some stylistic features, a scheme introduced by Julián Peralta in his book La orquesta típica (2008) is used in its updated version, edited by bandoneonist Francesco Bruno (2011).1 El entrerriano, composed by Rosendo Mendizábal in 1897, is the oldest known piece extant in today’s tango repertoire and is organized in a three-part structure. Apart from its historical relevance, it has been recorded by many tango orchestras and therefore allows for a comparative analysis. The diagrams of the arrangements of Pugliese’s and Salgán’s orchestras were taken from Bruno’s thesis. The last diagram, illustrating the arrangement by Piazzolla for his Octeto Buenos Aires, has been added by me. Unfortunately, Beytelmann did not record this piece, so it is not possible to develop a complete overview of the approach to this work by all four musicians studied in this book. El entrerriano has a traditional structure, which makes any modification in the arrangements easy to identify. For each version a diagram is constructed that shows: • • • • • • •

the general structure of the arrangement (sections, phrases, semi-phrases, motives, bars); the instrumentation (tutti, soli, solo, instruments or instrumental sections involved); the texture (melody with accompaniment, homophony, polyphony); the kind of accompaniment (marcatos, countermelodies, background figures); the kind of speech used in each thematic fragment (rhythmical/melodic, staccato/legato); the connections between phrases and sections (connecting passages, sudden changes); the different tempos.

The information is displayed on a timeline marked with bar numbers. This type of visualization provides an overview of the many features of each arrangement at a glance. It cannot contain all of the information present in a recording or in a score, but it is used here as a tool for the comparison of certain primary aspects of the musical organization. Figure 8.1 on the companion website is an explanatory legend of the information shown in the diagrams. The main textural layer is referred to as ‘melody’.

Mendizábal’s El entrerriano 211 Just above the bar number line at the bottom of the diagram, accompanimental features are shown. Two types of figures are used: Passage: this is a short passage with no melodic function, mainly used as a fill or for connecting consecutive phrases. The instrument or section involved is displayed above the rectangle signalling each passage. Model: this is a recognizable tango accompaniment pattern, with specific kinds of marcato indicated previously (e.g. Mc). There is generally no explicit indication of the instruments used because the accompaniment is generally played by the piano and double bass (the standard rhythmical base). The thematic structure is detailed in the middle area of the diagram. Two different markings are used to indicate the kind of speech in each thematic fragment: Rhythmical: when the thematic material is played in a rhythmical, heavily articulated way. Melodic: when a line is played legato, in a non-rhythmical and less articulated way. Due to the many interpretative nuances, when a distinction is made between rhythmical and melodic sections, this classification should be considered as an approximate indication. The height of the rectangles ( and ) indicating the thematic material reveals the instrumental section involved. As shown in Figure 8.1 on the companion website, five kinds of orchestration are distinguished: solo (a label specifies the solo instrument), violins, bandoneons, bandoneons + violins, and tutti. In the soli and tutti sections, instruments generally play in parallel motion; unison segments are explicitly labelled. The types of marcato included in the diagrams are shown in Figure 8.2 on the companion website. Other labels in the diagrams are indicated in Figure 8.3 on the companion website. Figure 8.4 on the companion website shows the original, published solo piano score of El entrerriano with indications of its formal features. This is followed by the three diagrams illustrating the arrangements by Salgán (Figure 8.5), Pugliese (Figure 8.6) and Piazzolla (Figure 8.7), all on the companion website. The following observations regarding the diagrams clearly indicate the main stylistic traits of the musicians under study.

Formal structure The formal structure of the original piece is A-B-A-C-A, with each section consisting of the typical two eight-bar phrases. In traditional versions this structure is maintained, as in those by the orchestras of D’Arienzo, De Angelis, Basso, Troilo and Francini-Pontier. The formal organization in the versions studied here reflects the less conventional approaches of their creators and the contrasts they have introduced. Pugliese and Salgán omit the middle section A to create

212

Mendizábal’s El entrerriano

diversity, while Piazzolla maintains the original structure but heavily alters its symmetry. In the Figures that follow are three tables summarizing the formal structure of the three versions studied here. The rows in the tables indicate: • • • •

arranger; overarching formal segmentation (A-B-C); number of bars in each large section; division into phrases of the bars within the sections.

Salgán’s version presents the formal structure in regular eight-bar phrases with occasional extensions, which he accomplishes by adding eight-bar phrases to the usual two per section. In his version of El entrerriano, he compensates for a longer section B by removing an eight-bar phrase from section C, therefore achieving an average of two phrases per section in the first three sections. The final formal section (A2) is significantly extended through the addition of two extra eight-bar phrases, plus a short segment at the beginning (to connect to the piano solo) and at the end (to conclude the piece). Pugliese’s version is arranged in asymmetrical segments and contains larger alterations compared to the original formal structure. Additional bars are consistently used to emphasize segmentation and to keep the pacing unpredictable. In contrast to Salgán’s version, Pugliese’s greatly extends section A1 and shortens the others, while the regular eight-bar-phrase organization is abandoned. He also

Figure 8.8 Formal scheme of Salgán’s arrangement

Figure 8.9 Formal scheme of Pugliese’s arrangement

Figure 8.10 Formal scheme of Piazzolla’s arrangement

Mendizábal’s El entrerriano 213 inserts a passage (marked ‘p’) between sections C and A2 based on theme B that then continues into A2 as an accompanying base. His technique of superimposing thematic materials from different sections is therefore emphasized: section A2 is accompanied by a variation of theme B. In addition, the theme from section B is maintained from one section to the next, through an interweaving of the phrases, as we have seen previously in the analysis of Pugliese’s La mariposa. Piazzolla’s version also contains significant asymmetries and contrasts compared to the original formal structure. As in Salgán’s, the last section (A2) is heavily altered and extended, while section B is reduced to only four bars. In addition, Piazzolla is the only arranger to begin a new section without a connecting or preparatory passage, as can be seen in the transition from A1 to B, which are simply separated by a rest. This is unusual in the genre and demonstrates a stylistic feature already observed in several of his other pieces, e.g. Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi. Although Piazzolla maintains the original formal structure (he does include the middle section A), he significantly alters it with a free electric guitar solo that never states the A theme in full. The segmentation produced by the use of the electric guitar concertante is completely unusual in tango, as are the length and melodic features of this improvised solo. However, in contrast to the usual way in which he structures sections and phrases, he remains here connected to traditional tango through his frequent use of segmentation based on instrumentation, accompanying marcatos and the alternation between melodic legato and rhythmical articulated segments.

Accompanimental models Salgán’s version uses frequent syncopation, one of the main features of his style. When a marcato in 4 is performed there is often a preceding arrastre that destabilizes the S-W structure of the 4/4 meter (the accent now falls on beat four instead of beat one). Other ways in which he counteracts the steady beat are through the fast tempo of the piece and the pizzicato line in the double bass. Moreover, he frequently alternates between different marcatos, as in section B, in which the accompanying base changes almost every bar. The only moment where the marcato stays stable, with no arrastre, is in section A2. This steady accompaniment contrasts with the ever-changing one in previous phrases and supports the long, phrased piano solo. Also typical of Salgán is the change of marcato to demarcate or connect phrases and to emphasize segmentation. Pugliese’s version – as might be expected – is based on an accompaniment in yumba, his musical signature. He uses a 3–3–2 passage and interruptions in the marcato in order to destabilize the steady beat, emphasize segmentation and create contrast and diversity. The tempo is slower than in Salgán’s version, which is necessary for his heavy, thick musical language. Another distinctive device that can be observed in this arrangement is his use of extreme changes in tempo through rallentando and accelerando passages for the whole orchestra. Many of these rubatos are applied to the extensions added to the original formal structure, creating asymmetries and emphasizing discontinuity.

214

Mendizábal’s El entrerriano

Piazzolla’s version presents a wide array of marcato patterns, which change on a much more frequent basis than in most of his compositions. His typical 3–3–2 rhythm alternates with segments of marcato in 2, in 4 and in syncopation, which destabilize the meter. The accompaniment based on thematic two-bar ostinatos (heard during the guitar solos) is also a main aspect of Piazzolla’s music. In the third phrase of section C, a salient feature already seen in Tres minutos con la realidad can be observed: a passage that counteracts the steady beat with a 3–3–3 rhythmical structure. The steady marcato of section A2 contrasts with the everchanging ones of previous phrases and supports the long, improvised guitar solo (as happened in Salgán’s version with the piano solo).

Orchestration In order to remain concise in this chapter, many important issues regarding register and voicing will not be discussed in the general descriptions that follow. Those aspects have already been thoroughly studied in previous chapters. In most of Salgán’s arrangement, the bandoneons and violins play the theme in unison over a rhythmical base, thus maintaining the typical melody and accompaniment texture of tango music. However, the frequent changes in rhythm, instrumentation and register give the piece a complex and varied musical surface. In section B there occurs a kind of dialogue in which the piano concertante plays solo passages against the rest of the orchestra, as does the guitar some bars later. This use of the guitar is unusual in orquestas típicas, while the concertante treatment of the piano, as manifest in its final extensive solo, is a main element of Salgán’s style. Lastly, in this arrangement there again occurs an increase in instrumental density by accumulation: after the long piano solo, the violins enter and, finally, for the last phrase, the bandoneons join in as well. Pugliese’s orchestration is assembled in a varied and ever-changing way. Different instrumental sections alternate continuously, which generates a more discontinuous language than that of the other versions analyzed here. Solo, soli and tutti fragments are shaped in a wide variety of combinations that seem to take the conflicting nature of tango music to an extreme. A remarkable feature is the effect obtained by the frequent movement between different instrumental sections (A1: A8–A13 bandoneon and violin solo, A1: A25–A26 bandoneons and piano/ bass, A1: A27–A28 tutti and bandoneon solo and A2: A7–A13 bandoneons and piano). A similar effect is achieved in segment ‘Pasaje’: p9 – p12, right before A2, where the theme, presented in a yumba rhythm, is orchestrated: the rhythmical base performs on beats one and three while the rest of the orchestra states the theme on beats two and four. Piazzolla’s version is more continuous, with his orchestration mainly organized into unison blocks whose contrasts are articulated through changes in register (indicated in the diagram, Figure 8.7 on the companion website). A main feature of this arrangement is that, apart from a short segment of soloistic bandoneon, the electric guitar functions as the concertante instrument. This constitutes a triple anomaly in the tango world. First, the timbre of the electric guitar was not a part

Mendizábal’s El entrerriano 215 of the tango language before Piazzolla. Second, the total duration of the solos played by the guitar in this arrangement is atypical, occupying almost half of the piece. Finally, the solos are not written but improvised, and the rhythmical and melodic treatment of the thematic materials in these improvisations is more related to jazz than to tango.

Melodic features As regards interpretation and variation techniques applied to the themes, the three musicians remain faithful to their styles. The main elements studied in previous chapters feature prominently in these arrangements. In Salgán’s version, most variations involve altering the rhythmical structure of the themes. He uses syncopated, varying rhythms in the melodic lines, helping to create his light, articulated language. In addition, some fragments are varied with the usual variación tango technique. Lastly, a main feature of his compositional language is affirmed: in section A2, a newly crafted melody is introduced. This melody is based on materials from section A1, yet differing substantially from it, leading it to be perceived as completely new material. Moreover, it is stated in a legato, lyrical and phrased piano solo that has little obvious relation to the articulated, rhythmical character of section A1. In Pugliese’s version, the original themes are generally maintained, being varied mainly through contrasts in instrumentation and rubatos for the full orchestra. In contrast with Salgán’s and Piazzolla’s treatment of the thematic materials, Pugliese reduces the rhythmical density by keeping only the main features of the theme and stating them in a variety of ways: a sort of synthesis of both the themes’ profiles and their general structures. Lastly, the rhythmical organization of the melodic lines generates a sense of discontinuity that gives his music a strong, rhythmical drive. In Piazzolla’s version, which is also delivered in a faster tempo, we immediately perceive the composer’s aim to impress. Themes are varied in a virtuosic way and, as in Salgán’s version, some fragments are re-created with the usual variación technique. Contrary to Pugliese, Piazzolla emphasizes rhythmical structures by increasing the rhythmical density and adding frequent ornamentation and sixteenthnote passages that give the piece a continuous sense of nervousness. Structural notes are interspersed with turns, diatonic and chromatic passages, acciaccaturas and repeated notes that fill in longer notes. As can be seen from these analyses and the considerable differences between the three versions, the term re-creation better fits the practice of tango arrangement, which remains, still, a vast unexplored territory.

Note 1 As presented in his bachelor thesis How can tango styles be compared? (2011). I am grateful to Francesco Bruno for providing this useful material and for his help with the software used to generate the diagrams.

9

The impact of this artistic research on my own music Bárbara Varassi Pega

In this chapter I discuss three works I composed – each a direct result of experimenting with the materials and techniques studied – in light of the findings of this research. The aim is to show how tango’s main features and techniques can be employed in different ways, including the development of original creations within the genre through the same process of analysis, reflection and experimentation that I have discussed in previous chapters. The new insights presented in this volume provide diverse, powerful tools with which musicians can enrich their skills. These insights also offer a unique opportunity to understand the musical language of tango as a whole, with practices related to composition, analysis, research and performance becoming inextricably linked to one another. The musicians studied in this volume demonstrated a huge amount of creativity in their approach to tango music, clearly showing this language’s possibilities for further development. It is my hope that the following shall inspire more confident experimentation with tango’s features as well as the exploration of its possibilities and boundaries.

The impact of this artistic research

217

In the music I have composed and arranged, based on the findings of this study, I have thoroughly assimilated the concepts, techniques and materials present in the analyzed pieces and made them my own. Through experimentation, I have produced a number of new works that illustrate the impact of this research on my artistic and creative processes. I strongly believe that through a better understanding of tango’s main features and techniques, musicians will be able to experiment with them and apply them in diverse musical settings just as Pugliese, Salgán, Piazzolla and Beytelmann have done. The Art of Tango therefore intends to be understood as a resource that provides the tools to fulfil such undertakings. The full analyses of three of my pieces follow: • • •

Pin, for violin and piano, is based on the vals criollo rhythm. Al artesano, for tango quartet (violin, bandoneon, piano and double bass), is a tango. Más, muchísimo más, for tango quartet (violin, bandoneon, piano and double bass), is a milonga ciudadana.

Pin Recorded live in April 2019 by Gustavo Cabrera, violin and Bárbara Varassi Pega, piano Duration: 4′47″ The complete score and recording of Pin are to be found on the companion website. Pin is a composition for violin and piano on a vals criollo (tango waltz) rhythm. The piece is based on variations of the typical 3/4 waltz meter through the displacement of some of its rhythms to create an irregular metric structure. The resulting mixed meters produce a rhythmical instability alien to the waltz rhythm, yet without nullifying it (until the contrasting section B). As observed in other pieces, some parameters must be kept stable while modifying others. Thus, to compensate for the metric irregularity, many defining characteristics of the tango waltz are respected, such as mostly regular phrases (Figure 9.1 on the companion website), themes that begin with an eighth rest, clearly defined melodies, legato articulation, predominantly two-bar motives, melodic profiles (chromatic, primarily stepwise, and with leaps followed by contrary motion), use of hemiola and the traditional waltz accompaniment pattern. The tripartite form in Pin differs from the typical bipartite form of a vals criollo, and sections are always tied together with connecting passages. Variations on the number 3 are pursued on different levels: the waltz meter, the number of sections in the piece, the number of phrases that constitute A and C, and other aspects that will be analyzed in the following paragraphs. Lastly, Pin uses the same materials to create different melodic lines in each section. Introduction (from bar 1 with upbeat to bar 2), [00:00–00:08]: this brief introduction performed by solo piano asserts the waltz rhythm while presenting

218

The impact of this artistic research

materials that will be used in the successive melodies (Figure 9.2 on the companion website): • •

Harmony: chords formed with thirds and fourths while the bass line moves in stepwise motion (chromatic or diatonic). Melody: the introduction uses mainly the interval class 5 (later established in section A, both in the accompaniment and in the melody). As already mentioned, the interval spans are filled in with stepwise motion and chromaticism. As usual, structural notes are enriched with varied ornamentation. Section A (from bar 3 to bar 28), [00:08–00:56]

a1 (from bar 3 to bar 12), [00:08–00:27]: in this phrase, the piano states the theme in a cantabile manner while introducing the first metric alterations (Figure 9.3 on the companion website). The bass line descends in stepwise motion, counteracting the generally ascending melodic line. In the first five bars there is a sequence of mixed meters: 3/4, 7/8, 4/8, 7/8 and 3/4. If we consider the number of eighth notes in these five bars, we arrive at the following calculation: 6 + 7 + 4 + 7 + 6 = 30 These metric irregularities are thus regularized on a larger scale: 30 eighth notes are equivalent to what we would find in five regular 3/4 bars. In the next five bars, this metric pattern is repeated, completing a ten-bar phrase composed of two symmetrical segments, as is typical of a tango waltz (even if in a traditional vals phrases would be eight bars long). a2 (from bar 13 to bar 20), [00:27–00:41]: in this phrase the violin repeats a1 with a few variations and one octave higher. It is two bars shorter, as both the fifth and the last bars of the theme – both in 3/4 – are omitted to further destabilize the waltz rhythm. a3 (from bar 21 to bar 28), [00:41–00:56]: this phrase is the consequent of a1 and a2 and is based on similar materials (Figure 9.4 on the companion website), played by the violin yet an octave higher than the previous phrase. The octave transpositions featured in the theme throughout a1, a2 and a3 represent another variation on the number 3. In order to reinforce the waltz rhythm prior to the contrasting section B, a3 contains more 3/4 bars than previous phrases. It also features bars containing its counterpart – 6/8 – in the traditional use of hemiola in the vals criollo. In the concluding four bars, the original sequence of meters (6 + 7 + 4 + 7 eighth notes) is used for the last time. Then, in the final two bars of section A (bars 27–28), the eighth-note subdivision stops in order to demarcate the beginning of the following section: B. Bridge (from bar 29 to bar 34), [00:56–01:02] and Section B (from bar 35 to bar 75), [01:02–01:56] These sections contrast with the previous one mainly through their rhythmical, articulated character and their motives, which begin on the downbeat. Some

The impact of this artistic research

219

materials of section A are freely developed, such as the intervals and the pitches, which are re-ordered through permutation techniques (Figure 9.5 on the companion website). Rhythms and motivic structures are also varied, and everything is played at a slightly quicker tempo. The perception of the waltz is lost, but not the predominance of the melodic line or the typical segmentation into phrases. The alternation of sections with rhythms from different origins (tango, waltz, folklore, etc.) is an unusual practice in tango that occurs sporadically in pieces by Piazzolla, Salgán, Beytelmann and others. Some examples of this are Aquellos tangos camperos by Salgán, which alternates sections of tango with sections of folklore; Balada para un loco by Piazzolla, which alternates tango and waltz; and Sigamos by Beytelmann, which alternates tango, rhythms alien to tango and rhythms related to Argentinian folklore. Although the theme of section B deviates radically from the theme of section A – it features many leaps that are not followed by contrary stepwise motion – both themes are related. The use of mixed meters (3/8, 4/8, 5/8 and 6/8) intensifies and alternates randomly, and the percussive accents contribute to the incisive character of this segment. b1 (from bar 35 to bar 43), [01:02–01:11]: after a connecting bridge (‘Bdg’ in Figure 9.1 on the companion website) that establishes the new character of section B, the violin plays the new theme of this section. b2 (from bar 44 to bar 53), [01:11–01:20]: this phrase functions as a consequent to the previous one and presents similar materials, albeit now transposed. b3 (from bar 54 to bar 63), [01:20–01:35]: the passage from bars 54 to 57 connects the phrases and stabilizes the meter into a steady 7/8 while gradually ascending to the higher registers, where the next theme will begin. As in Pugliese’s La mariposa, the melodic line of this connecting passage becomes the accompanimental layer, starting in bar 58 with the entrance of the piano solo (Figure 9.6 on the companion website). The pitches and intervals used for the melodic line of the piano in b3 are derived from section A. The theme is played in three octaves in the higher registers, creating a registral contrast against the previous sections. Another interpretative feature used here, typical of the genre, is the simultaneous staccato articulation in the right hand and legato articulation in the left hand of the piano (from bar 58). b4 (from bar 64 to bar 75), [01:35–01:56]: as with the violin solo in b1 and b2, the piano solo also presents an antecedent-consequent structure, b3 (bars 54–63) and b4 (bars 64–75). Instrumental density is gradually increased through chords that thicken the piano passages. The tessitura is expanded as the left hand gradually returns to the lower registers, leading to section C. Section C (from bar 76 to bar 100), [01:56–03:04] This section presents another contrast in character: slower and more lyrical. Both melody and accompaniment are played legato and phrased, with rhythmical values longer than those in previous phrases (Figure 9.7 on the companion website). Section C is made up of three phrases, unified by a continuous twenty-four bar violin solo, in which the metric and harmonic sequences of section A are reused. The theme here

220

The impact of this artistic research

is new and establishes an intermediate section that smoothly connects section B (incisive, rhythmical and articulated) with section A′ (legato, with a waltz rhythm). Bridge (from bar 100 to bar 105), [03:04–03:17]: this segment quotes the renowned tango waltz La loca de amor, composed by Pablo José Vázquez, and leads to the violin cadenza of the following section. This draws upon the practice of quoting other works, as already seen in pieces by Salgán, Piazzolla and Beytelmann. Section A′ (from bar 106 to bar 139), [03:17–04:34] The theme from section A returns with variations and is achieved through the gradual reintroduction of its constitutive materials in three stages (a1′, a2′ and a3′). This notion of gradual process was taken from Beytelmann and applied to a new aspect: the return of the theme. a1′ (from bar 106 to bar 113), [03:17–03:42]: in this phrase the A theme returns as a free, phrased violin cadenza. a2′ (from bar 114 to bar 121), [03:42–04:02]: here the violin presents a synthesized melodic line based on the main materials of the A theme, while the piano resumes playing variations of the waltz accompaniment (Figure 9.8 on the companion website). The piano enriches the accompaniment through discontinuous thematic passages that are gradually expanded, leading towards a full statement of the original theme. This is connected to the concept of thematic evocation seen in Salgán’s arrangement of Gran Hotel Victoria (where the original theme’s harmonic progression is the only element kept intact, allowing the recapitulation to be perceived) and to the process of ‘thematization’ seen in Piazzolla’s Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi (where an ostinato progresses from comprising primarily repeated notes to articulated lines with a clear melodic profile). The metric and harmonic sequences of a2 are repeated literally. a3′ (from bar 122 to bar 129), [04:02–04:15]: the main theme of the piece finally returns in full with the original instrumentation. There are some variations in rhythm and register that create tension and lead to the climax in a4. a4 (from bar 130 to bar 139), [04:15–04:34]: this is the first and only phrase of the piece played by both instruments in parallel motion. It uses the main materials of the composition to create a new theme that leads to the Coda. Coda (from bar 140 to bar 146), [04:34–04:47]: after a brief connecting passage in the violin (bar 140), the accompaniment in b3 and b4 is restated in 6/8. In the absence of a clear melodic line, this material is heard as the main textural layer and concludes the piece. This idea presents the inversion of the technique analyzed in pieces written by Pugliese and Salgán; in this instance the accompaniment becomes a main melodic line.

Al artesano Recorded by Tango Tinto ensemble in Camino esquivo, 2016. Gerardo Agnese, bandoneon; Vincenzo Albini, violin; Bárbara Varassi Pega, piano and Virgilio Monti, double bass. Duration: 3′29″

The impact of this artistic research

221

The complete score and recording of Al artesano are to be found on the companion website. Al artesano was written for the classic instrumentation of a tango quartet: violin, bandoneon, piano and double bass. I composed this piece using Pugliese’s A los artistas plásticos and Negracha as well as derivative pieces, such as Piazzolla’s Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi and Fracanapa, as models. Al artesano is based on compositional techniques derived from Western art music. Phrases are interwoven in the Beytelmann style, whose techniques also inspired the gradually increasing and decreasing instrumental density. Al artesano originates from a two-bar motive. The material in all of the sections is crafted from that motive by means of the different techniques described in the following paragraphs, hence the title of the piece – To the craftsman – a tribute to the four artists studied in this volume. The form (A-B-A′-Coda) presents different sub-sections made up of regular eight-bar phrases that usually contain a short extension in order to emphasize segmentation (Figure 9.9 on the companion website). Formal segmentation is further accentuated by the two bridges between the larger sections, which make the transitions smoother. In addition, the bridges divide the sections into groups of 3, 2 and 3 sub-sections, respectively. This is a variation of the 3–3–2 formal structure used by Piazzolla in his Tres minutos con la realidad. The first bar (short introduction) in Al artesano [00:00–00:02] is a nod to Pugliese’s A los artistas plásticos, since in both pieces the main interval is clearly stated: a perfect fourth in Pugliese’s piece and a minor sixth in mine. Section A (from bar 2 to bar 27), [00:02–00:53] a1 (from bar 2 to bar 10), [00:02–00:20]: this phrase contains three differentiated textural layers. The bandoneon presents the main theme; the violin plays a rhythmical countermelody based on structural materials; and the accompaniment (piano and double bass in unison) develops diverse rhythms that sometimes constitute two-bar motives (as in Piazzolla) and sometimes no repeated patterns at all (as in Salgán and Beytelmann). The accompaniment alternates between rhythmicalaccentual alignment and contrast in relation to both the melody and its countermelody, thus animating the rhythmical structure. The motive from which the whole piece is crafted is introduced in the first two bars of the bandoneon theme (bars 2–3, Figure 9.10 on the companion website). The articulations used, the syncopated beginning and the accentual contrasts with the rhythmical base are all typical of tango. In bars 4–5 (Figure 9.11 on the companion website), the motive is inverted, with small variations in order to remain in the G minor tonality and develop the previous motive. Bars 6–7 constitute the typical anomaly within the theme (as described in Chapter 2), although the interval class 4 remains central. In bars 8–9 the original motive is stated in retrograde, again with small variations. Bar 10 is an extension that destabilizes the meter and delays the resolution of the cadence until the first bar of a2. The techniques used are shown in Figure 9.11 on the companion website.

222

The impact of this artistic research

a2 (from bar 11 to bar 19), [00:20–00:37]: this phrase is a variation of the previous one, with the main theme now presented by the violin. In the opening bar, the bandoneon concludes its theme (a1) over the beginning of a2, interweaving the two phrases (Figure 9.12 on the companion website). The violin line is a variation of a1, yet one octave higher and simplified through a reduction of materials and a decrease in rhythmical density. This requires the rhythmical augmentation of some notes in order to achieve rhythmical alignment with the structure of both the phrase and the accompanying marcato. The bass line is repeated, and the rhythmical base is enriched by the countermelody from a1, now presented by the bandoneon and the piano’s right hand. In bars 13 and 17 the violin and bandoneon exchange their lines in order to vary the orchestration and achieve continuity with a1 (the theme is indicated with rectangles in Figure 9.12 on the companion website). In order to create contrast, variation in the accompaniment is introduced in the second semiphrase (bars 15–19), while instrumental density is increased, leading to a3. a3 (from bar 20 to bar 27), [00:37–00:53]: in this phrase, the a1 theme is again restated. The violin concludes its theme (a2) over the beginning of a3, again interweaving both phrases. The theme now explores an expansion of the intervals while the timbre (bandoneon) and the rhythmical structure of a1 are maintained. Once again, this demonstrates the technique of keeping some parameters stable in order to vary others. The greatest contrast with the previous phrases lies in the sudden reduction of instrumental density in bars 20–23, in which the double bass plays the accompaniment alone while the violin plays chicharra. From bar 24 there occurs an instrumental accumulation that restores the tutti for the conclusion of section A and leading to the upcoming Bridge. Finally, the bandoneon again weaves the sections together, this time with long notes, as in many of Beytelmann’s pieces (an E♭ is held between a3 and the Bridge, a D is held between the Bridge and section B). Bridge (from bar 28 to bar 33), [00:53–01:18]: this segment is inserted in order to make the transition to section B smoother by reducing tempo, dynamics and both textural and registral densities. The musical material is derived from section A (especially the intervals of a sixth) and is now used to create the themes of section B. Section B (from bar 34 to bar 50), [01:18–01:58] Section B is typically melodic and is organized into two phrases, b1 and b2. b1 (from bar 34 to bar 41), [01:18–01:37]: this phrase is a piano solo formed from pieces of a melodic line derived from the Bridge (Figure 9.13 on the companion website). It features the contrast in character that is typical of the genre, reinforced by a decrease in textural density and dynamics. Figure 9.13 on the companion website shows the techniques used to generate the melodic lines of section B: the upper staff presents the original line (Bridge, bars 28–33); the middle staff shows the melodic line derived from the Bridge by reorganizing some of its pitches (used for creating the piano solo in bars 34–41); and the lower staff shows the inversion of the melodic line in the middle staff (used verbatim for the

The impact of this artistic research

223

violin solo in bars 41–48). The melodic line used for the piano solo (Figure 9.14 on the companion website) is created through a reduction of materials of the line in the middle staff in Figure 9.13 on the companion website. It is accompanied by a rhythmical base of milonga campera in the double bass. b2 (from bar 42 with upbeat to bar 50), [01:37–01:58]: in this phrase, the piano solo is repeated, here acting as a countermelody to the main textural layer in the violin (demonstrating the exchange of background and foreground layers already analyzed in this volume). The bandoneon joins in, alternating between a marcato in unison with the double bass and a reinforcement of the piano’s melody. Bars 49–50 introduce materials from the upcoming Bridge (bars 51–53), tying together both sections. Bridge (from bar 51 to bar 53), [01:58–02:04]: this is a connecting passage between section B and the recapitulation of section A. Its materials derive from the violin countermelody in a1. Section A′ (from bar 54 to bar 85), [02:04–03:05] In section A′ the phrases of A are varied and presented in inverted order (a3′, a2′, a1′), resulting in a type of palindromic form: a1, a2, a3 – B – a3′, a2′, a1′ – Coda. This notion of formal organization was inspired by Beytelmann’s Otras voces and Salgán’s Don Agustín Bardi, here taken to a new extreme. a3′ (from bar 54 to bar 63), [02:04–02:23]: this phrase is a variation of a3. The main idea was to form a rhythmical complement between the lines of the bandoneon left hand and the double bass so that each instrument would play when the other rested. The accompaniment in the violin and the piano was added at a later stage and is again derived from the materials in the violin countermelody of a1. Bar 62 presents a metric and melodic deviation aimed at interweaving this segment with the following one; bar 63 is both the end of a3′ and the beginning of a2′. There is also a rhythmical asynchrony between the cadence of the bandoneon and the cadence of the piano. a2′ (from bar 64 to bar 72), [02:23–02:39]: in this phrase, the main themes presented in a1 and a2 are superimposed in their original instrumentation (bandoneon and violin). Thus, the original theme and its rhythmical augmentation are played simultaneously. The rhythmical base remains as in a2 except for bars 67–68, where a marcato in 4 ‘in the Arolas style’ is used to create contrast and to emphasize bars 69–70, leading to a1′. a1′ (from bar 73 to bar 85), [02:39–03:05]: this is the most elaborate phrase of A′. After a two-bar pedal on G that reinforces the division between a2′ and a1′, there is a variation by rhythmical compression of the countermelody in a1. It consists of a five-bar (rather than four, as in a1) mixed-meter sequence: 5/4, 4/4, 4/4, 6/4 and 4/4. The violin plays chicharra, while the piano left hand and the double bass resume the bass line of a1. In bars 78–81 there is an ostinato in rhythmical unison, again based on a1, with an accompaniment in the double bass. The bass line is based on sixths, the main interval of the piece, and is grouped into sets of three ascending, arpeggiated eighth notes. In addition, the first note of every

224

The impact of this artistic research

three-note group chromatically descends, creating a melodic bass line. The metric structure in this passage becomes irregular through the use of bars in 7/8 and 6/8. Bars 82–85, a literal repetition of bars 78–81, function as an extension of a1′. This extension is my version of the technique analyzed in some pieces by Pugliese and Piazzolla; it helps to emphasize the conclusion of section A′. Coda (from bar 86 to bar 94), [03:05–03:29]: this final section is a continuation of a1′. In these bars the motives previously used in the piece are superimposed, yet rhythmically unaligned, creating a strong sense of instability. In bar 93 the bandoneon plays a typical variación on the main theme with which the piece began.

Más, muchísimo más Recorded live with Tango Gradus ad Parnassum, 9 December 2014. Santiago Cimadevilla, bandoneon; Ruzana Tsymbalova, violin; Bárbara Varassi Pega, piano and Virgilio Monti, double bass Duration: 2′41″ The complete score and recording of Más, muchísimo más are to be found on the companion website. Más, muchísimo más is a piece based on the milonga ciudadana rhythm, composed for the classic instrumentation of a tango quartet (violin, bandoneon, piano and double bass) and inspired in part by Astor Piazzolla’s Milonga loca and Milonga del ángel. The main idea for this composition was to explore and expand upon the possibilities of variation with the milonga ciudadana’s traditional rhythmical formulas, taking what Piazzolla did with the milonga campera rhythm as an example. The uniqueness of the piece lies in the fact that the characteristic bass pattern of the milonga ciudadana (generally steady and repetitive) has been varied to the point that almost no two bars are identical. As with Pin, these modifications give a strong sense of instability that is here compensated for by a certain stability in other parameters, such as clearly defined themes and a steady meter (written in 2/2 instead of the usual 2/4 in order to facilitate the reading of quick rhythmical figures). In most of section A, the piano left hand does not play in unison with the double bass, as is common, but rather plays two-hands ripieno passages in the higher registers (in the Salgán style), leaving registral space for the double bass line to be clearly heard. Furthermore – and in contrast to genre conventions – the piece is based upon the rhythmical accompaniment rather than on the themes, which function instead as a means to give the piece a unified form. This technique presents an alternative to that proposed by Pugliese, in which a steady base supports the alterations made to the main themes. In addition, the melodic lines are deliberately simple and continuous in order to emphasize and support the permanently changing rhythmical-accentual structures. Lastly, the A – B – A – Coda form that is typical of the genre is maintained, although the sections feature prominent asymmetries (Figure 9.15 on the companion website).

The impact of this artistic research

225

Introduction (from bar 1 to bar 2), [00:14–00:17]: in this brief two-bar introduction, a parallel passage in tutti establishes the milonga rhythm and the tonality E minor (Figure 9.16 on the companion website). The one-bar motive introduced here is used throughout the piece as an ostinato passage that connects and demarcates sections and also serves as a deviation from the primarily polyphonic texture. Thus, the formal segmentation in Más, muchísimo más is established by both motivic and textural aspects (in the Beytelmann style). Section A (from bar 3 to bar 70), [00:17–02:03] The entrance of the violin, absent in the introduction, distinguishes the beginning of section A. This is the largest section of the piece. It is divided into four asymmetrical sub-sections that are presented in ascending order (Figure 9.15 on the companion website). a1 (from bar 3 to bar 12), [00:17–00:33]: in this first sub-section, the violin presents the main theme in an eight-bar phrase while the double bass begins to play variations on the milonga rhythm and polyphony is introduced (Figure 9.16 on the companion website). The violin begins with a typical chromatic upbeat figure that has been transformed by permutating its pitches. The ripieno accompaniment in the bandoneon and the piano is made up of passages in stepwise motion derived from the ostinato motive in the introduction. In the last bars of a1 (bars 9–12) the ostinato resumes with a gradual increase in dynamics and instrumental density until it reaches a full tutti in the last two bars (indicated by vertical lines in Figure 9.17 on the companion website). This further emphasizes the division between a1 and a2. a2 (from bar 13 to bar 29), [00:33–01:00]: this sub-section acts as the consequent of a1. It begins with the bandoneon playing a variation of the theme from a1 (here encompassing thirteen bars) and with a sudden dynamic and textural reduction. The piano and the violin continue the ostinato motive from the previous phrase until bar 13, interweaving both phrases. a2 presents the following characteristics: • • •

•

A change in texture and accompanimental rhythm in bars 17–19: the accompaniment suddenly presents a strong change in texture, rhythm and accentuation in order to provide contrast and diversity. Fragmentation of the melodic line: this occurs in bar 20 when the violin joins in the high register as the main voice, reinforced by the bandoneon and the piano. A formal extension: bars 26–29 constitute an extension of the previous phrase that results in one of the many formal asymmetries of the piece. The ostinato (with some rhythmical variations) is used to demarcate the conclusion of a2 and is varied through different combinations in instrumentation. There is again an increase in textural and instrumental densities (the left hand of the piano is added). Introduction of new material. Two elements that will be developed later in the piece are introduced: (1) a rhythmical countermelody by the violin and the right hand of the bandoneon (bars 26–27) that re-creates and expands upon a figure in bar 14 and (2) trills in the violin.

226

The impact of this artistic research

a3 (from bar 30 to bar 50), [01:00–01:32]: in this sub-section, materials from previous phrases are used in free counterpoint and presented in different instrumental combinations. In bars 30–35 the theme is interrupted, further emphasizing the polyphonic texture. Climactic moments demarcate phrases and are indicated by dynamic and textural changes. These can be seen in the almost homorhythmical passage of bars 36–38 and in the parallel unison of bars 47–50, where the piano first adds the ostinato of previous sections and then joins the parallel unison. The double bass continues with variations on the milonga ciudadana rhythmical pattern, while the violin (from bar 38) plays a contrasting melodic line made up of long notes derived from the previous themes. a4 (from bar 51 to bar 70), [01:32–02:03]: a sudden change in dynamics and textural density clearly demarcates the beginning of this sub-section, which is divided into two phrases by a contrasting solo violin passage (bars 60–61, Figure 9.18 on the companion website) derived from the motive of bar 14. The division created by this passage is further emphasized by one of only two interruptions of the double bass line in the whole piece (the other occurs in the Coda). In the first phrase (bars 51–59), the ostinato motives and the fragmented lines formerly used as ripieno are now varied and presented in a free counterpoint, lacking a main theme. In order to unify this sub-section, there is a gradual increase in textural, registral and instrumental densities throughout a4. The second phrase (62–70) is primarily organized into two homorhythmical blocks that are superimposed: the violin, bandoneon and piano right hand play a varied ostinato motive (on the tonic E minor), while the double bass and piano left hand play the typical milonga campera rhythm in unison (maintaining the same tempo). This last phrase (Figure 9.18 on the companion website) presents major contrast with both the previous phrases and the upcoming section B. Section B (from bar 71 to bar 80), [02:03–02:18] B functions as the typical contrasting middle section, yet is presented here in an unusually short duration. One of its main features is the initial modulation to D major, with the new theme, consisting primarily of quarter-note triplets, stated by the bandoneon (Figure 9.19 on the companion website). The remaining instruments play a homorhythmical accompaniment that contrasts with that of previous phrases and which is heard as discontinuous due to the interruptions generated through frequent rests. Towards the end of the bandoneon’s solo, the ostinato of section A is superimposed in order to emphasize the section’s ending, while the violin changes register to begin a melodic line that connects to its solo in section A′, thus interweaving both sections. Section A′ (from bar 81 to bar 95), [02:18–02:41] The theme in this section is recapitulated in a manner similar to its treatment in a1, although it is now transposed to B minor. The left hand of the piano finally plays in unison with the double bass, as is expected in the genre (Figure 9.19 on

The impact of this artistic research

227

the companion website). At bar 88 the ostinato returns homorhythmically, now with a thicker orchestration and a longer duration. The end of this section is emphasized by materials already used, such as the violin trills and chromatic passages in the piano. The double bass is interrupted for the second time, and thus an implementation of the same technique demarcates the two most contrasting moments of the piece: the passage from section A to section B and from section A′ to the Coda. Coda (from bar 96 with upbeat to bar 104), [02:41–02:56]: this is the final variation of the ostinato, restated in an instrumental accumulation (cumulative entrances shown with arrows in Figure 9.20 on the companion website) and with a gradual increase in dynamics. Although each layer uses similar ostinato motives, they do not align until the last bar of the piece. In the last bar, all of the instruments align in a homorhythmical tutti passage in which the double bass stands out, this time due to its contrary motion.

Chapter review and additional remarks What follows is a summary of the features dealt with and introduced through an analysis of my own music as part of the creative, practical aspect of the artistic research project from which this volume emanates. Formal features In my work I have tried to expand upon the formal segmentation that is so typical of the genre. Thus, besides using traditional structures based on bipartite and tripartite forms, monothematic and multi-sectional pieces were written (which might include irregular and asymmetric motives, semi-phrases and phrases) based on certain analyzed aspects of the works composed by Pugliese, Piazzolla and Beytelmann. A further focus has been on exploring alternatives to traditional segmentation, utilizing textural contrast and the manipulation of explicit beat, techniques incorporated from Beytelmann’s compositions. Segmentation was also achieved through establishing contrasts of a diverse nature: thematic, tonal, modal, of character, of tempo and of articulations. Other techniques used are based on different ways of connecting phrases and sections, including the analyzed models of interweaving or overlapping (Pugliese, Beytelmann), linking through a connecting passage (Salgán), or clearly dividing through breaks between sections (Piazzolla). Melodic features and thematic variation The usual construction of a tango theme – one based on structural notes and heavy ornamentation – lends itself well to motivic variation by the systematic use of compositional techniques employed in certain forms of Western art music. This is illustrated in Al artesano (analyzed in this chapter), in which all of the themes are derived from the opening two-bar motive through techniques including transposition, retrograde, inversion, retrograde-inversion, inversion-retrograde, permutation,

228

The impact of this artistic research

rhythmical augmentation and diminution, intervallic augmentation and diminution and other devices related to rhythmical and melodic variation. I also experimented with Piazzolla’s technique of cumulative development as well as Beytelmann’s development of melodies through progressive variations or successive modulations. Other techniques for thematic variation worth exploring include: • • •

•

•

Variation through reduction of structural materials: in a recapitulative passage, only the essential elements of the theme are presented, without which the theme would not be recognizable. Variation through increase of structural materials: in a recapitulative passage, the essential elements of the theme are maintained while new materials are added. Variation through decrease in parametric complexity: certain parameters are removed from a given theme. For instance, if a theme contains contrasting dynamics and many ornaments, in its second presentation it will have stable dynamics and no – or fewer – ornaments. Variation through increase in parametric complexity: new parameters are added to a given theme. For instance, if the first presentation of a theme is by means of a melody and accompaniment, its recapitulation will be based on counterpoint; if it has few notes in its first occurrence, it will contain many diverse figures when it returns. Variation in theme length: the theme is presented in successive versions with contrasting lengths. This technique can be used in combination with the others described previously.

In exploring the construction of themes, intervals were used both melodically and harmonically, and new melodies were crafted from successive or simultaneous discontinuous segments (as in Beytelmann) or derived from countermelodies for the main theme (as in Salgán). Other material is based on the varied repetition of ostinatos that, in the absence of a main melodic line, are perceived as the main textural layer (as in Piazzolla and Pugliese). Lastly, Pugliese’s technique of establishing a steady rhythmical marcato in order to support frequent changes in the melody and orchestration inspired me to do just the opposite: creating a piece where the main role of the theme is to unify the rhythmical base, whose bass line presents ever-changing rhythms (Más, muchísimo más, analyzed in this chapter). Texture Most of the pieces I write or arrange feature a basic texture of melody and accompaniment that is made more complex in at least one phrase or section by adding other voices and generating a polyphonic texture (using free counterpoint and imitative segments). The textures used include numerous types of polyphony, melody with accompaniment and monody. In order to experiment with these techniques, I have applied gradual processes that work to unify the piece, such as changes in register, dynamics and instrumentation.

The impact of this artistic research

229

Rhythm and meter Besides using the usual models of tango accompaniment put together in different sequences (with or without connecting passages), I have frequently altered the basic S-W structure of 4/4 by using polyrhythm or mixed meter – or combinations of the two – or employing an accompanimental base consisting of superimposed, contrasting rhythms, all of these techniques inspired by those incorporated within Beytelmann’s works. Regarding the traditional rhythms of vals criollo and milonga, two pieces of mine experiment with these basic rhythmical patterns. In Más, muchísimo más, the multiple formulas used are based on the rhythm of milonga ciudadana, inspired by Piazzolla’s innovative use of the milonga campera rhythm. In Pin, I employed mixed meter to stretch the vals criollo rhythm to the furthest point where – even when not in 3/4 – it could still be perceived as a waltz. Both these pieces are analyzed in this chapter. Orchestration In addition to exploring many possibilities of instrumental and registral combination, I also examined the use of extended instrumental registers. A further focus has been to experiment with atypical ensemble configurations – such as piano and double bass duo, piano four hands and electroacoustic ensemble (clarinet, cello, piano and electronics) – and continue the trend of treating the ensembles as a group of soloists, usually including principal melodies for all of the instruments in the line-ups.

10 Summary and outlook Bárbara Varassi Pega

Many features have come to light in the analyses of the pieces created or re-created by the musicians under study – Osvaldo Pugliese, Horacio Salgán, Astor Piazzolla and Gustavo Beytelmann – together with insights into the innovative work of Julio De Caro, their direct musical predecessor. The artistic concepts and theoretical foundations covered in this volume provide tools for comprehending how tango is created, performed and transformed while preserving its relevance as vivid contemporary music. This information – regarding techniques, processes and materials – establishes a detailed synopsis with which musicians can develop their own skills in arranging, composing and performing tango music. Furthermore, the set of analytical tools discussed in this volume and summarized in what follows can be applied to other works composed by the musicians featured in this volume as well as others, allowing the continuation of a research practice that may shed additional light on the implicit artistic processes in tango.

Summary and outlook

231

Summary Formal features In general, we observe a gradual process of expansion of the formal size and variety of musical structures. In the development of tango, as reflected in the analyses, pieces have become both longer and more asymmetrically built. Sections tend to contain more phrases, and those phrases may also be longer or consist of a variable number of bars, making segmentation less predictable. In the case of Pugliese, Salgán and Piazzolla, extensions are mainly obtained through adding bars to regular eight-bar phrases (either to support or counteract the formal segmentation), which is also the length of a typical tango theme. In the case of Beytelmann, this regularity is rarely maintained, and phrases tend to be longer, in correlation to his equally longer themes. Solos might not align with the formal structure, as in earlier tangos. Even when functioning as the distinctive element of sections and sub-sections, solos may start sooner, in anticipation, or continue further into a new section, as particularly evident in music by Piazzolla and Beytelmann, occurring sometimes in Pugliese and rarely in Salgán. For the formal construction of phrases and sections – apart from the usual contrast between types of speech (melodic, legato versus rhythmical, articulated), themes, character, articulation, rhythm, modes, tonalities or instrumentation – Beytelmann introduces textural contrasts as well as contrast through altering the perception of the beat. Additionally, he creates climaxes and segmentation by synchronizing changes in texture, register, dynamics, rhythm and other elements. Piazzolla also presents a new way of contrasting different formal sections, e.g. through superimposing a lyrical phrase over an omnipresent rhythmical ostinato. Challenging the conflicting nature of traditional tango, Piazzolla occasionally creates sections in which instrumentation, dynamics, register, rhythmical base, harmony and other aspects are left unchanged, while Pugliese moves from one section to the next simply by adding a new textural layer containing the melodic material. The ways in which consecutive phrases or sections may be connected are summarized as follows: •

•

•

Interweaving or overlapping: this occurs when certain musical elements (e.g. pitches, rhythms, registers, motives, instruments, timbres) are maintained from one section to the next, making segmentation smoother and building momentum. Through connecting passages: consecutive phrases or sections are tied together by connecting passages. These might present complete melodies, brief figures, chords or even single notes. They can be classified as ‘affirmative’ when they maintain the character of the groups they link or as ‘preparatory’ when they announce the beginning of a new phrase with a different character. Clearly divided: some phrases or sections are abruptly separated by a brief pause.

232

Summary and outlook

Melodic features Typical melodic lines – based on structural notes and heavy ornamentation – are used by all four composers. The ornamentation derives from tango tradition as well and includes the usual turns, a wide range of grace notes and both chromatic and diatonic motion connecting the chord tones. The themes are generally organized through the repetition or combination of motives. However, some alternatives to that standard are utilized. Pugliese and Piazzolla, for example, use repetitive motives and ostinatos as a main textural layer even when these do not constitute clear themes. The systematization of this technique can be observed in many of Piazzolla’s compositions, in which the ostinatos may also act as a ripieno or as an accompanimental figure. Piazzolla also creates themes consisting of minimal materials – sometimes only repeated notes with ornamentation – that gain significance through superb instrumental interpretation (phrasing). In turn, Beytelmann uses ostinatos to realize formal functions: emphasizing climactic moments and closing sections. He also uses brief, non-repeating motives to form melodic lines. In some of his pieces, individual motives are frequently reorganized to create different melodic lines, some of which may contain, as part of their design or profile, a modulating structure that provides differentiation to the formal sections by stating each repetition of the theme in a new tonality, reached by the modulation presented in the theme preceding it. Another common feature is that the thematic construct is based upon intervals. Many pieces are based on the systematic use of certain intervals, which Piazzolla and, especially, Beytelmann also use harmonically. Thematic generalizations are found as follows: • • • •

In different textural layers: some features of the theme are used to create or vary motives of the accompaniment (countermelody, ripieno or rhythmical base). In different sections: use of materials or characteristic features from one section in other sections (Beytelmann’s so-called polyphony of ideas). As a monothematic form: the same theme is presented in different formal sections but in a varied manner. At the motivic level: the same motive is presented in a variety of consecutive and/or superimposed versions.

Melodic lines can be presented in various combinations, exploring their possibilities of transformation: overlapped, out of phase, rhythmically varied (also rhythmically augmented or diminished), inverted, in imitation, in homorhythm, thickened or thinned, compressed or expanded, developed and in free counterpoint. Other interesting features implemented to create melodic lines in a tango include the cumulative development of a motive, the use of quotes and the use of elements from Argentinian folklore. In some of the pieces by Salgán, Piazzolla and Beytelmann analyzed in this volume, musical quotes (both literal and stylistic) evoking the repertoire and orchestras of the 1940s can also be discerned.

Summary and outlook

233

Harmonic features Tango music is primarily tonal, and harmonic structures are formed from the basic progressions I-IV, V-I or II-V-I. Although developments in the harmonic thinking can be observed within the work of the four musicians over time, they all preserve the basic harmonic principles. Pugliese and Salgán contributed more complex harmonic sequences through their use of secondary dominants, seventh chords and modulations. In the case of Piazzolla the boundaries of tonality are often stretched, while in the case of Beytelmann they are permanently expanded. The modulations used by both Piazzolla and Beytelmann are innovative, appearing more frequently than is typical in traditional tango and including foreign tonalities. These new tonalities are either established through modulating passages or established abruptly. They both use altered and superimposed chords, although Piazzolla – who also used octatonic scales – did not apply this technique systematically. More typical of his language are the passages of superimposed or successive fourths and tritones, in contrast to the more traditional passages built from thirds or sixths. Beytelmann uses polytonality: chords are often superimposed and, regardless of whether they are perceived as altered or extended, they still maintain their harmonic functions. Furthermore, he alters certain scales in order to characterize specific passages or sections. Regarding the bass lines in the marcatos (expressing harmonic material), the traditional bass line profile is based on the structural notes of the harmony, with or without ornamentation. Piazzolla’s innovation can be seen in the way he simplifies the bass line’s profile by featuring repeated pitches or fewer pitches than usual. In addition, his typical descending quarter notes in half or whole steps give a new profile to the typical tango bass line. In Beytelmann’s music, the use of (melodic) bass lines featuring notes alien to the chords in the given harmony regularly provides tonal ambiguities. Lastly, in many pieces by the musicians studied in this volume, the accented notes in the piano left hand are thickened through the addition of extra notes, generally forming perfect fifths or octaves. Rhythm and meter All four artists have used the possibilities inherent to the rhythmical patterns of tango extensively. They have expanded upon different combinations and even introduced newly developed marcatos that carry each artist’s signature. Pugliese introduced the yumba, a special type of marcato in 4, as well as the open ending ‘in the Pugliese style’. He also made a groundbreaking contribution by featuring polyrhythm or metric alternation (6/8, 3–3–2 or 3–3–3 within a 4/4 meter) in some of his pieces, this feature later becoming a standard in Piazzolla’s music. Salgán’s music expanded the use of syncopated rhythms, employing them systematically in melodies, ripienos and accompaniments to animate his works. This is most clearly exemplified by his umpa-umpa rhythm. He also used rhythmical features (mainly marcato in 4) to demarcate formal sections. Piazzolla systematized the 3–3–2 rhythmical pattern. His works feature a wide range of variations on it (2–3–3,

234

Summary and outlook

3–2–3, 3-3-3-3-3-1 and 3–5, among others) and the superimposition of these variations over a 4/4 structure (inspired by Pugliese). Besides employing it traditionally, as a rhythmical base, Piazzolla applied the 3–3–2 pattern to other aspects of his compositions, such as the formal structure of phrases and sections or the rhythmical shape of melodic lines. He also systematized the slow milonga rhythm, definitively introducing it to the genre in a new version that combines elements from both the milonga campera and the milonga ciudadana. Beytelmann introduced the use of ever-changing rhythmical figures organized in such a way that they resist forming patterns. In his music, the accompaniment layer may also be interspersed with the typical chords of the marcato, thematic passages, fragments of a variación and new variations based on traditional marcatos. Both Piazzolla and Beytelmann propose various endings that diverge from the traditional I-V-I (on beats one, two and three – or four with Pugliese – respectively) in the last bar of the piece. The use of elements that counteract or alter the steady beat is yet another central element of tango music and an aspect in which the styles of the four musicians meet. Rhythmical and accentual contrasts result in a complex musical texture, even when remaining in the traditional 4/4 meter. The most frequently used device by the four musicians is the extreme dynamic differentiation between accented and non-accented elements and the placement of accented elements in parts of the bar that counteract the metric structure. Rhythmical and accentual patterns are constantly varied and give tango music its strong and articulated character. Additionally, many forms of polyrhythm are created through the superimposition of different rhythms. Other elements used to alter the regularity of the steady beat include: upbeats, rhythmical shifts, arrastres, syncopation, phrases beginning with a rest on the downbeat, polyrhythm, phrasing, rubato, articulations, ornamentation and frequent changes in the marcato. A sequence of contrasting marcatos may occur within a short segment (Pugliese, Salgán, Beytelmann and, surprisingly, the earlier De Caro as well) or over larger formal units (Piazzolla), either supporting or counteracting the formal segmentation. The entrances of changes in the accompanying rhythmical base are sometimes staggered within the different textural layers or can be gradually introduced (a marcato can progressively become more rhythmical by means of the durations, articulations and dynamics used, or vice versa). The changes may occur smoothly, by means of a connecting passage, or they may be delivered abruptly. Another way of altering the steady beat is with the implementation of mixed meters, systematized mainly by Piazzolla and Beytelmann. In many of Beytelmann’s works, meter is not established as in traditional tango, but arises from the organization of pitches, rhythms, accents and articulations. In addition, through emphasizing, counteracting, ‘modulating’ or blurring the steady pacing, he plays with the listener’s perception of the beat. In this way, Beytelmann increases the complexity of his music and presents an alternative to the binary organization (S-W) that is a core element of tango. The analyses included in this volume revealed many other features related to rhythm and meter. These include complementary rhythmical layers as well as the use of non-pitched marcatos, homorhythmical blocks and two-bar ostinatos to

Summary and outlook

235

accompany the main textural layer. Interesting to note, the rhythmical devices and even marcatos developed by tango musicians are primarily tactics and methods to avoid the sense of a steady pacing. Clear examples of this are: Pugliese’s rubato with the entire orchestra and the yumba not exactly matching the beat; Salgán’s extended use of syncopation, fills, upbeats and ornaments; Piazzolla’s meter changes and superimpositions as well as the use of 3–3–2 marcatos; and Beytelmann’s free use of rhythm, mixed meters and ever-changing figures. We can therefore claim that tango music is most defined by its beat in 4/4 and its S-W structure within bars, while its core practice – be it in performance, arrangement or composition – is about how to circumvent this basic pattern. Relationship between melody and accompaniment The rhythmical base can either support or work against continuity in a given section. The interruption or change of the accompaniment may be used to highlight segmentation and feature contrasts, while stable marcatos may be used as a strong foundation upon which the main melodic lines can be developed in a varied way. The conflicting nature of tango music can be further emphasized through placing a syncopated theme over a downbeat marcato or placing a theme played on the downbeat over a syncopated marcato. The resulting rhythmical-accentual contrast is typical of the genre and helps to animate the pieces and differentiate the textural layers. On occasion, melody and accompaniment can even work in rhythmical complementarity, as in Pugliese. The combination of strongly articulated ostinatos and melodic solos is a typical feature of Piazzolla’s music, while in Beytelmann’s the de-contextualization of tango materials helps to suppress the hierarchy between layers. Another feature (also connected with orchestration) regarding the hierarchical relationship between the melody and the accompaniment is the ambiguity that is generated when background and foreground are interchanged. This technique is evident in pieces by all four musicians and was already traceable in De Caro’s style. It generally occurs when a new melodic line fully takes the forefront, while the main theme is offered as a countermelody or ripieno: a simple, intelligent and creative way to thwart the listener’s perception, giving the impression of a brand new section by merely adding a melodic line to already existing material. Finally, both the melody and the accompaniment can present similar types of speech (both melodic and legato or rhythmical and articulated) or, instead, contrast one another (a melodic, legato melody over a rhythmical, articulated accompaniment, or vice versa). Textural features As mentioned earlier, the basic texture of tango music consists of melody and accompaniment. Throughout the development of this musical language the texture has become increasingly polyphonic and various contrapuntal features have been introduced. These polyphonic features may include the use of superimposed melodic lines or differentiated textural layers presenting contrasting materials. The

236

Summary and outlook

basic textural organization is thus a melody, a ripieno (which can include a variety of elements and countermelodies) and a rhythmical base. Within these three main textural layers many combinations are possible and are put to effective use in the common practice of tango music. The use of imitative passages has further enriched the construction of polyphony, and all four musicians have systematically used contrary motion within layers or between different layers to enhance their works. The ever-changing roles of the instrumental layers – especially in the works of Pugliese and Salgán – and the contrasts obtained through articulations, timbre, register, dynamics, speech used (melodic/rhythmical), rhythms, etc., all serve the purpose of creating more complex textures. Piazzolla even introduced fugues to the tango world. Beytelmann’s systematic use of polyphonic passages and a wide variety of textures gives his music a much more complex structure, more connected to so-called Western art music than to the tango tradition. In many of his pieces, the alternation between these various textures plays a formal role. Lastly, Beytelmann uses contrapuntal motion to organize changes in instrumentation and register. This helps to create smooth transitions between different elements, supporting a kind of fluency that operates in strong contrast to the sudden changes that are so typical in traditional tango music. Orchestration The use of orchestration represents yet another important means to generate diversity and contrast. For this reason, it is common practice to frequently vary the orchestration and to explore many instrumental combinations that alter the timbre. The melodic lines, countermelodies and accompaniment are often divided amongst different instruments or textural layers (Pugliese being progressive for his period in this respect and Piazzolla being surprisingly more conservative). Additionally, discontinuous musical fragments played by different instruments can be perceived as a single, timbrally fragmented melodic line. The resulting discontinuity – unusual in earlier tangos, in which phrases, semi-phrases and motives were generally stated by a single instrument or section – is compensated for by a variety of processes that work to unify the piece. These may include gradual changes in dynamics, register, tessitura, rhythms and articulations. Orchestration is thus inextricably linked to composition and arrangement and represents one of the main areas of development within tango music. It is also a reason why this music needed to be notated. Another new development in orchestration is the sequential process of instrumentation (in this book referred to as an increase or reduction in instrumental density by accumulation or dispersal), which strongly contrasts with the modification of instrumentation in blocks that is so typical of earlier tango. Other features are more related to each musician’s style. In Pugliese’s music, orchestration is varied on a frequent basis and solos never exceed a whole phrase. Within his orchestrations there is no dominant instrument, although the piano is the position from which Pugliese leads the orchestra, and there is always a bandoneon solo. In Salgán and Piazzolla’s music there is instead a much clearer focus on certain specific instruments, as both musicians composed and arranged in a way

Summary and outlook

237

that gave them soloistic roles. In the case of Salgán, the role of the piano concertante is defined by the continuous interjections of his instrument, the piano, in countermelodies, connecting passages, solos, accompaniments and marcatos. In the case of Piazzolla, his soloistic role on the bandoneon is demonstrated through extended solos and virtuosic passages, as he composed and arranged music partly because of his drive to perform on stage. Throughout the oeuvre of Salgán, Piazzolla and Beytelmann – mainly due to the fact that they also worked within smaller ensembles compared to the former orquestas típicas – there is a gradual change towards the ‘ensemble of soloists’. More importance is given to each instrument, and all of the instruments in the ensemble play solos and main lines. Piazzolla further emphasized this treatment of his ensembles (especially the quintet) as if inspired by the jazz bands he admired, and many of his innovations in composition and orchestration stem from this approach. Piazzolla writes with the quintet’s musicians in mind and always highlights their qualities by means of tailor-made passages through which they can excel (this also relates to the previously mentioned length of instrumental solos and the use of unvarying orchestration). Beytelmann also treats the ensemble as a group of soloists but does not generally base his compositions on his musicians’ strengths, focusing, rather, on the ideas he is trying to convey. In this respect, Beytelmann’s compositional process usually begins with a novel concept, which somehow relates to materials, techniques or devices that he would like to explore. Finally, we also see new instrumental combinations, such as the guitar-piano duo by Salgán and the drums, vibraphone and electric guitar in Piazzolla’s ensembles, while Beytelmann assembles atypical ensembles. Variation techniques Variation techniques are used to create contrast and segmentation as well as provide the music with a certain flow. As Beytelmann often says, ‘in order to guarantee change, you have to guarantee continuity, and in order to guarantee continuity, you have to guarantee change’. Variation techniques are also necessary in order to compose entire pieces from the typical two-theme formal structure of tangos. Most tango features originate from the need to create variations on the constituent elements of this musical language, and the techniques developed in order to do so are many. This tradition reveals the long-standing creativity of tango musicians and their intuitive, brilliant approach to music materials and techniques. As regards variation techniques, in all of the analyses the use of parametric instability-stability (keeping one parameter stable while other parameters are modified) is first and foremost an exercise in balance. Among the variation techniques found, many are connected to the alteration of the steady beat, hence the various strategies of phrasing and the introduction of contrasting rhythmical patterns, as already described. Other variation techniques focus on the melody. Motives can be varied in many ways, through extension, compression, inversion, retrograde, permutation, imitation, diminution, augmentation, instrumentation, register,

238

Summary and outlook

dynamics, rhythm, articulations, profile, modulation or transposition. Piazzolla, for example, presents motives whose sequence of transpositions mirrors the typical tango ornament of a turn. Some materials can be freely developed rather than repeated, as in Beytelmann’s progressive variations. Melodic lines may also be varied through instrumentation (making them thicker or thinner) and texture (making them homophonic or polyphonic) in either gradual or abrupt manners. The single most defining feature of tango music – also connected to the concept of variation – is the typical contrast between melodic and rhythmical types of speech (be it in melodic or accompanimental material). In this respect, and through a wide range of creative solutions, the four musicians studied in this volume stay faithful to tradition. Furthermore, in the arrangements analyzed, the range of aspects that were traditionally subject to transformation (rhythm, articulation, instrumentation and phrasing) was further expanded to include character, phrase length, melodic profile of the theme, tonality and formal structure. Pugliese even applies characteristic features of one section to other segments, to create variation, and systematically superimposes materials from different formal sections. In recapitulative sections, Salgán presents a set of compelling variation techniques based on the shift, omission or combination of notes from the theme in order to alter rhythmical and melodic predictability, thwarting the listeners’ expectations. Another technique used by Salgán in recapitulative sections (and a main hallmark of his style) is the addition of countermelodies, either contrasting or similar to the main theme. In some pieces by Salgán and Beytelmann, recapitulative sections are generated through thematic materials that evoke the original theme without presenting it in full, demonstrating yet another innovative approach to the standard practice. Finally, Piazzolla presents a way of varying repetitive motives through a process of ‘thematization’. Use of register This aspect constitutes yet another way of creating diversity and contrast. All available registers are thoroughly used in varied and repeatedly changing combinations. Registral changes and the frequent compression and expansion of the tessitura are characteristic elements of tango music. A primary feature of Salgán’s piano playing, for example, is the use of the higher register, which contributes to his light and syncopated style. Pugliese, instead, remains in the lower register of the keyboard in order to support his heavy, deep musical language. Piazzolla either varies or maintains a restricted tessitura throughout an entire section or piece, while Beytelmann affirms the traditional use of register, even in unusual instrumental combinations. Beytelmann develops this usage further, employing register as an independent parameter that can reinforce or counteract formal segmentation or that functions as a thematic element. Register may also be used to discern thematic from accompanimental layers. This kind of registral arrangement is used mainly in small ensembles to imitate the application of different registral sectors within the orquesta típica.

Summary and outlook

239

Performance techniques Most of the previously mentioned features are closely related to tango interpretation, one of its main characteristics being the use of a steady rhythmical base that allows the other instruments to phrase freely. Phrasing allows the musician to deliberately avoid the rigidity of the steady beat (particularly the downbeat) by ‘floating’ over it rather than aligning with it. Therefore, tango musicians play phrase-byphrase, guided more by the musical flow of the melodic lines than by the supporting rhythmical base. Phrasing also includes the use of ornaments and the free interpretation of many features of the melodic line’s rhythm and profile as well as its register, dynamics and articulation. Mostly used in solos, phrasing can also occur in soli, tutti or full tutti passages, even occurring independently in diverse, overlapping instruments or textural layers. Pugliese’s music provides a best practice of orchestral phrasing (rubato), while Piazzolla demonstrates unique treatment of independent phrasing for all instruments in many of his quintet compositions. In Piazzolla’s and Beytelmann’s music, solos include features from diverse forms of Western art music and jazz, which constituted an innovation in the genre. In rhythmical sections, syncopated accents are used to fight against the beat, creating a wide range of rhythmical figures and resulting in a complex musical surface. The extreme dynamic disparity with which accented and non-accented elements are played is another main aspect of tango performance that the four musicians maintain. Accented elements are often given a strong, percussive attack, while non-accented elements are executed quickly and lightly, often almost imperceptibly. Yet another relevant aspect of tango performance is the use of extended techniques in all instruments, usually referred to as timbral and percussive effects. Timbral and percussive effects Timbral and percussive effects typical for tango have been employed by all the musicians studied, as these are a central feature of tango music. These effects are used to emphasize heavily articulated passages, to create contrast and variation and to animate the music. Contrasts occur at both a harmonic level (as these effects can momentarily suspend the use of pitch) and at a rhythmical level (as they usually do not align with the meter). A full description of the effects found in the analyses is included in Chapter 2.

Outlook As shown in the analyses, the four artists studied here – Pugliese, Salgán, Piazzolla and Beytelmann – have helped to both define the model of tango music and to ‘thicken’ or stretch that model through contributions of their own. This can clearly be seen in how they took elements from the tradition and expanded upon them while introducing new techniques and materials that renewed this musical language. In the case of Pugliese, Salgán and Piazzolla, these contributions have been assimilated and are today part of the main tango language. However, the in-depth contributions they made are often approached in a superficial way. Their

240

Summary and outlook

principal stylistic features are frequently reproduced but deprived of the complex compositional constructions they were originally a part of. In the case of Beytelmann, several composers are already following his path; it is to be expected that other musicians will continue to explore his music and build upon his groundbreaking work. Their contributions also signal a significant development and shift away from the creation of simple tunes tailored to dancing towards a complex and highly artistic musical language in its own right. In this respect, we can also observe a discrepancy across the oeuvre of the four musicians: Pugliese initially maintained a strong connection with the realm of dance, actually playing at dance venues, until eventually – together with Salgán, Piazzolla and Beytelmann – he began to increasingly disengage from the realm of dance, finally breaking away from it entirely. This is of course reflected in their respective styles. As they did not need to meet the requirements of dancers (especially regarding the steady beat), they increasingly took creative liberties which helped them define their own voices with fewer constraints or none at all. The search for their unique and distinctive voices in turn determined their repertoires: from the shared or commissioned arrangements played by Pugliese’s orchestra to exclusively original and self-written arrangements and compositions in the repertoire of Salgán’s, Piazzolla’s and Beytelmann’s diverse ensembles. Tango’s continued development and innovation will only be assured through a better understanding of its main features and techniques, enabling further experimentation and fruitful contributions by upcoming generations of musicians. This can then lead to new ways of approaching this musical language, through processes similar to those chosen by Pugliese, Salgán, Piazzolla and Beytelmann. By making the implicit knowledge in scores and recordings explicit and available for creative use by the greater artistic community, the direct influence of these artists’ works can enlighten and inspire. Analysis and theoretical research have uncovered extensive aspects and details that musicians are often unaware of while performing tango. Likewise, playing tango with a thorough knowledge of its musical language will afford better tools and new approaches. Finally, beyond and behind tango music itself, other aspects related to its place of origin have also been touched on in this book. This is the musical and historical make-up of the genre that is connected to the River Plate area and its background and in which certain aspects of a culture are clearly recognizable. Tango as an art form can be seen as a product of its many realms, defined by a heritage of contrasts, contradictions, mixtures and passions. Therefore, it is not surprising that traces of tango’s origins and development can be detected in the music, and we can expect that the tango arising in the future will expand upon those very same aspects. The artists expressed – all with their own voices in the music they created – some aspect of this universe, while also bestowing meaning to their own art. The case studies featured in this volume thus also intend to provide a glance into this remarkable piece of heritage, beyond the strictly musical approach that is its core subject matter.

Bibliography

Adler, S., 2008. Lo studio dell’orchestrazione. Torino: EDT srl. Adorno, T., 2004. Teoría Estética. Madrid: Akal. Aldwell, E. and Schachter, C., 2003. Harmony and Voice Leading, 3rd Edition. Belmont: Thomson Schirmer. Asociación Argentina de Musicología, 2010. Revista Argentina de Musicología, 11. Córdoba. Astarita, G., 2002. Argentino Galván. Chivilcoy: Academia Nacional del Tango. Astarita, G. All texts written for Todo Tango. Available from: www.todotango.com [Accessed 17 February 2019]. Atlas, A., 2008. Astor Piazzolla: tangos, funerales y blue notes. In: García Brunelli, O., ed. Estudios sobre la obra de Astor Piazzolla. Buenos Aires: Gourmet Musical Ediciones, 77–88. Azzi, M. S. and Collier, S., 2000. Le grand tango: The Life and Music of Astor Piazzolla. New York: Oxford University Press. Baboni Schilingi, J., 2007. La musique hyper-systémique. Paris: Éditions Mix. Blanpain, K., 2008. Academic Writing in the Humanities and Social Sciences: A Resource for Researchers. Leuven: Uitgeverij Acco. Bruno, F., 2011. How Can Tango Styles Be Compared? Thesis (BA). Codarts University of the Arts, Rotterdam. Buch, E., 2010. El caso Schönberg: nacimiento de la vanguardia musical. Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica. Buch, E., ed., 2012. Tangos Cultos: Kagel, J. J. Castro, Mastropiero y otros cruces musicales. Buenos Aires: Gourmet Musical Ediciones. Cabrera, G., 2018. How Do I Implement Tango Techniques for Violin? Thesis (BA). Codarts University of the Arts, Rotterdam. Cadícamo, E. and Sierra, L. A., 1977. La historia del tango. La época Decareana. Buenos Aires: Corregidor. Cimadevilla, S., 2010. Improvisation on Bandoneon solos in Argentine Tango: How Is a Bandoneon solo Constructed? A Study of the Soloistic Language of Astor Piazzolla. Thesis (BA). Codarts University of the Arts, Rotterdam. Corrado, O., 2002. Significar una ciudad: Astor Piazzolla y Buenos Aires. Revista del Instituto Superior de Música, Universidad Nacional del Litoral, Santa Fe, 9, 52–61. Corrado, O., 2010. Música y modernidad en Buenos Aires: 1920–1940. Buenos Aires: Gourmet Musical Ediciones. De Caro, J., 1964. El tango en mis recuerdos. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Centurión.

242

Bibliography

Del Priore, O., 2007. Osvaldo Pugliese. Una vida en el tango. Buenos Aires: Editorial Losada S.A. Donozo, L., 2006. Diccionario bibliográfico de la música argentina y de la música en la Argentina. Buenos Aires: Gourmet Musical Ediciones. Drago, A. M., 2008. Instrumental Tango Idioms in the Symphonic Works and Orchestral Arrangements of Astor Piazzolla: Performance and Notational Problems: A Conductor’s Perspective. DMA document, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg. Eco, U., 2002. Cómo se hace una tesis. Barcelona: Gedisa Editorial. Etchegaray, N., Molinari, A., and Martínez, R., 2005. Don Osvaldo. Tango para piano y sociedad. Buenos Aires: Foro Argentino de Cultura Urbana. Fain, P., 2010. La flauta en el tango. Munich: G. Ricordi & Co. Ferrer, H., 1999. El tango: su historia y evolución. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Continente S.R.L. Fessel, P., 2000. Condiciones de linealidad en la música tonal. Arte e Investigación, 4 (4), 84–89. Available from: http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/bitstream/handle/10915/18668/15Condiciones+de+linealidad.pdf?sequence=1 [Accessed 22 April 2014]. Fessel, P., ed., 2007. Nuevas poéticas en la música contemporánea argentina. Escritos de compositores. Buenos Aires: Biblioteca Nacional. Fischerman, D., 2009. Piazzolla el mal entendido. Buenos Aires: Edhasa. Fischerman, D., 2011. Escrito sobre música. Buenos Aires: Paidós. Gallo, R., 2011. El violín en el tango. Munich: G. Ricordi & Co. García Blaya, R. All texts written for Todo Tango. Available from: www.todotango.com [Accessed 19 February 2019]. García Brunelli, O., 1992. La obra de Astor Piazzolla y su relación con el tango como especie de música popular urbana. Revista del Instituto de Investigación Musicológica “Carlos Vega”, 12, 155–221. García Brunelli, O., ed., 2008. Estudios sobre la obra de Astor Piazzolla. Buenos Aires: Gourmet Musical Ediciones. García Brunelli, O., 2010a. Discografía básica del tango 1905–2010: su historia a través de las grabaciones. Buenos Aires: Gourmet Musical Ediciones. García Brunelli, O., 2010b. La irrupción del Octeto Buenos Aires en la historia del tango. Recepción social en el marco del cambio de la estructura de poder en Argentina en 1955. Revista Argentina de Musicología, 11, 117–145. García Brunelli, O., 2011. El tango en la obra de Juan José Castro. Revista del Instituto de Investigación Musicológica “Carlos Vega”, 25, 83–113. García Brunelli, O., 2015. La cuestión del fraseo en el tango. Zama – Instituto de Literatura Hispanoamericana, 7 (7), 161–170. Available from: http://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/ index.php/zama/article/view/2195/1926 [Accessed 2 March 2019]. Gobello, J. All texts written for Todo Tango. Available from: www.todotango.com [Accessed 10 January 2019]. González, J. P., 2013. Pensar la música desde América Latina. Buenos Aires: Gourmet Musical Ediciones. Gorín, N., ed., 1991. Astor Piazzolla: A manera de memorias. Buenos Aires: Editorial Atlántida. Gorín, N., 2001. Astor Piazzolla: A Memoir. Translated, annotated, and expanded by Fernando González. Portland, OR: Amadeus Press. Graciano, J., 2016. Método de Guitarra Tango. Buenos Aires: Melos Ediciones Musicales S.A.

Bibliography 243 Green, D. M., 1979. Form in Tonal Music: An Introduction to Analysis. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Guerra, H., ed., 1980. Prisma 20. 2 x 4 = Tango. Buenos Aires: Grupo Editor de Buenos Aires. Guinot, L., 2010. Análisis del tango Boedo (Julio De Caro). Unpublished document. Instituto Nacional de Musicología Carlos Vega, 2010. Música e investigación, 18. Keselman, J. and García Falcó, M., 2005. Osvaldo Pugliese. Buenos Aires: Centro Cultural Osvaldo Pugliese. Klein, J., Pitch Class. Available from: https://josephklein.music.unt.edu/sites/default/ files/90_pitch_class.pdf [Accessed 28 April 2014]. Kohan, P., 2010. Estudios sobre los estilos compositivos del tango (1920–1935). Buenos Aires: Gourmet Musical Ediciones. Krämer, U., 2002. Armonía y forma en María de Buenos Aires, de Astor Piazzolla. Revista del Instituto Superior de Música, Universidad Nacional del Litoral, Santa Fe, 9, 40–51. Kröpfl, F., 2009. Una introducción al análisis y la composición del ritmo. Lulú. Revista de teorías y técnicas musicales, 1, 113–116. Kuri, C., 2008. Piazzolla, la música límite. Buenos Aires: Corregidor. Kuss, M., 2008. La poética referencial de Astor Piazzolla. In: García Brunelli, O., ed. Estudios sobre la obra de Astor Piazzolla. Buenos Aires: Gourmet Musical Ediciones, 57–76. Lefcovich, N., 1987. Estudio de la discografía de Julio De Caro. Buenos Aires: S. Nicolás Lefcovich. Lefcovich, N., 1990. Estudio de la discografía de Osvaldo Pugliese. Buenos Aires: S. Nicolás Lefcovich. Lefcovich, N., 2001. Estudio de la discografía de Horacio Salgán. Buenos Aires: S. Nicolás Lefcovich. Lencina, T., García Brunelli, O., and Saltón, R., eds., 2009. Escritos sobre tango: en el río de La Plata y en la Diáspora. Buenos Aires: Centro ‘feca. Lima Quintana, H., 2009. Osvaldo Pugliese. Buenos Aires: Ediciones del CCC Centro Cultural de la Cooperación Floreal Gorini. Link, K. and Wendland, K., 2016. Tracing Tangueros. New York: Oxford University Press. Liska, M. M., 2005. Sembrando al viento. El estilo de Osvaldo Pugliese y la construcción de la subjetividad desde el interior del tango. Buenos Aires: CCC, Ediciones del Centro Cultural de la Cooperación Floreal Gorini. Lozza, A. M., 1985. Osvaldo Pugliese al Colón. Buenos Aires: Editorial Cartago. Luker, M. J., 2016. The Tango Machine: Musical Culture in the Age of Expediency. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Mansilla, S. L., 2011. La obra musical de Carlos Guastavino. Circulación, recepción, mediaciones. Buenos Aires: Gourmet Musical Ediciones. Marsili, A., 2014. Le langage musical et instrumental du tango rioplatense. Codes et convencionnalismes. Stuttgart: Abrazos. Mauriño, G., 2008. Raíces tangueras de la obra de Astor Piazzolla. In: García Brunelli, O., ed. Estudios sobre la obra de Astor Piazzolla. Buenos Aires: Gourmet Musical Ediciones, 19–34. Monjeau, F., 2011. Presencia del tango en la obra de Julio Viera. Tango: Créations, Indentifications, Circulations, Centre de recherché sur les arts et le langage (L’Ecole des hautes etudes en sciences sociales, EHESS, and Centre national de la recherche scientifique, CNRS). Globalmus Program, Paris. Monk, B., 2009. El saxofón en el tango: primer método para la inclusión del saxofón en nuestra música ciudadana. Buenos Aires: Melos Ediciones Musicales S.A.

244

Bibliography

Novati, J., ed., 1980. Antología del tango rioplatense, Vol. 1 (desde sus comienzos hasta 1920). Buenos Aires: Instituto Nacional de Musicología Carlos Vega. Nudler, J. All texts written for Todo Tango. Available from: www.todotango.com [Accessed 10 February 2019]. Nudler, J., Delhor, A., and Fernández, L., 2001. Astor Piazzolla: el tango culminante. Buenos Aires: Editorial La Página S.A. Otero, J. M., 2014. Redención. Blog Tangos al bardo. Available from: http://tangosalbardo. blogspot.nl/2014/04/redencion.html? [Accessed 10 March 2019]. Pelinsky, R., ed., 2000. El tango nómade: ensayos sobre la diáspora del tango. Buenos Aires: Corregidor. Pelinsky, R., 2002. Ostinato y placer de la repetición en la música de Astor Piazzolla. Revista del Instituto Superior de Música, Universidad Nacional del Litoral, Santa Fe, 9, 29–39. Pelinsky, R., 2008. Astor Piazzolla: entre tango y fuga, en busca de una identidad estilística. In: García Brunelli, O., ed. Estudios sobre la obra de Astor Piazzolla. Buenos Aires: Gourmet Musical Ediciones, 35–56. Peralta, J., 2008. La orquesta típica: mecánica y aplicación de los fundamentos técnicos del tango. Buenos Aires: Julián Peralta. Piazzolla, A., 1973. Interview. Sábados de Tango. TV, Montevideo. Available from: www. youtube.com/watch?v=tAYGME7UaHY [Accessed 27 March 2019]. Piazzolla, D., 2005. Astor. Buenos Aires: Corregidor. Possetti, H., 2014. El piano en el tango. Buenos Aires: Fondo Nacional de las Artes. Pujol, S., 2011. Historia del baile. De la milonga a la disco. Buenos Aires: Gourmet Musical Ediciones. Rodríguez, E. J., 2005. ‘Fracanapa’: Aspectos estructurales de la música de A. Piazzolla. Actas VI Congreso IASPM-AL, 198–207. Rouchetto, N., 1979. Osvaldo Pugliese, su trayectoria. La historia del tango Vol. 14. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Corregidor. Ruiz, I. and Ceñal, N., ed., 1980. Antología del Tango Rioplatense Vol. 1. Desde sus comienzos hasta 1920. CD ROM. Buenos Aires: Instituto Nacional de Musicología Carlos Vega. Salas, H., 2009. El Tango. Buenos Aires: Planeta. Salgán, H., 2001. Curso de tango. Buenos Aires: Horacio Salgán. Salgán, H., 2008. Arreglos para orquesta típica: tradición e innovación en manuscritos originales. Buenos Aires: Biblioteca Nacional. Schoenberg, A., 1951. Modelli per principianti di composizione. Milano: Curci. Schoenberg, A., 1963. El estilo y la idea. Madrid: Taurus. Schoenberg, A., 1967. Fundamentals of Music Composition. London: Faber & Faber Limited. Selles, R. All texts written for Todo Tango. Available from: www.todotango.com [Accessed 19 February 19]. Sierra, L. A., 1977. La época Decareana. La historia del Tango. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Corregidor. Sierra, L. A., 1985. Historia de la orquesta típica: evolución instrumental del tango. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Corregidor. Sierra, L. A. All texts written for Todo Tango. Available from: www.todotango.com [Accessed 11 February 2019]. Sierra, L. A., Rouchetto, N., and Cassinelli, R., 1979. La historia del tango, Osvaldo Pugliese. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Corregidor. Speratti, A., 1969. Con Piazzolla. Buenos Aires: Editorial Galerna.

Bibliography 245 Thompson Farris, R., 2005. Tango: The Art and History of Love. New York: Vintage Books. Ursini, S., 1993. Horacio Salgán. La supervivencia de un artista en el tiempo. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Corregidor. Varassi Pega, B., 2009. Musical Arrangements in Tango: An Encounter with Their Creators. Unpublished thesis (MA). Codarts University of the Arts, Rotterdam. Varassi Pega, B., 2012a. Otras voces. Gustavo Beytelmann: un lenguaje propio con raíces tangueras. Revista Argentina de Musicología, 12–13, 361–378. Varassi Pega, B., 2012b. Le strutture musicali. In: Angélica, A., Aleotti, M., and Ceva Valla, L., eds. Tango Puro. Milano: Hoepli, 23–37. Varassi Pega, B., 2014. Creating and Re-Creating Tangos: Artistic Processes and Innovations in Music by Pugliese, Salgán, Piazzolla and Beytelmann. PhD Dissertation. docARTES programme, Orpheus Institute and Academy of Creative and Performing Arts, Faculty of Humanities, Leiden University. Vega, C., 1936. Danzas y canciones argentinas: teorías e investigaciones, un ensayo sobre el tango. Buenos Aires: Ricordi. Wittlich, G., 1974. Interval Set Structure in Schoenberg’s Op. 11, No. 1. Perspectives of New Music, 13 (1), 41–55. Available from: www.jstor.org/stable/832368 [Accessed 2 June 2018].

Index

Note: Page numbers in italic indicate a figure on the corresponding page. accents 14, 15, 67, 108 accentual destabilization 67 accompaniment 213–214; melody and 235 Adiós Nonino 121: analysis of 146–159; formal scheme 147; score 149–158 Al artesano 217, 227; analysis of 220–224 Alessio, Enrique 33 A los artistas plásticos 36, 221; analysis of 62–65; score 61 ambiguity: between background and foreground layers 18, 27, 68, 76, 110, 163, 205, 235; hierarchical 200; perceptual 188 Aquellos tangos camperos 70, 119, 219 Argentinian at the Louvre, An 170, 180, 187 Arolas, Eduardo 3, 13, 31 Arolas style 13, 185, 197, 223 arrangement: call-and-response 23, 24; concept of 4; of De Caro 24, 32, 37; of El andariego 37; of La mariposa 45; and original pieces 44; and piano 8; of Piazzolla 8; and Pugliese 33; as re-creation 20–21; techniques of 45 arrastre 12, 13, 25, 29, 32, 96, 99, 108, 126, 164, 213 arrebatado 14, 41, 47, 126 articulations 14 asynchrony: between form and rhythmical accompaniment 36, 66; in changes of rhythmical base 109 attack 17, 125, 239 background layers 18, 27, 31, 36, 68, 163, 205 Baeza, Alicia Alonso 44 Bajour, Szymsia 33

Balcarce, Emilio 32, 34, 159; La bordona 191; orchestral version 193–194, 199; originality 192 bandoneon 19, 118 bandoneon school 28 Bardi, Agustín 31, 50, 76; Don Agustín Bardi 76 bass clarinet 70, 73, 170 Bernardo, Paquita 30 Beytelmann, Gustavo 7, 45; analysis of works 171–172; and clarinet 73; and contrasts 74; contribution to tango 240; Encuentro 74, 182–187; formal, textural and melodic features 202–205; his life 167–171; La bordona 191–200; new forms 8; orchestration 205–206; Otras voces 172–181; on Piazzolla 120; Preludio n. 1 187–191; and rhythm 11; rhythm and meter 206–207; style of 171–172, 231; thematic relations 181; variation techniques 206 Binelli, Daniel 6, 7, 33, 34 ‘black touch’ 72 Boedo: analysis of 23–28; and the De Caro school 28–29 Bonnat, Luis 33 bordoneo 11; La bordona 197, 202; Milonga del ángel 120, 122–126; tribute to Orlando Goñi 144, 162 Borovsky, Alexander 71 Bragato, José 127, 147, 165n11 Bruno, Francesco 210 Buch, Esteban 168 Cadícamo, Enrique 17 call-and-response arrangement 23, 24 Caló, Miguel 31, 71, 113

Index Camerano, Enrique 33, 35 campanitas 20, 97, 99, 104, 106, 172 Carrasco, Julio 33 Centro Cultural Osvaldo Pugliese 34 chicharra 19, 77, 104, 172, 222, 223 chords xvii chromaticism 49, 78, 80, 85, 162, 184, 188, 218 Ciriaco style 102–105 clarinet 73, 187–188, 189–191, 206; bass 70, 73, 170 Cobián, Juan Carlos 4, 17, 29, 31, 32, 150 ‘composers’ orchestra 33–34 composition 20–21 composition techniques 45, 96 concept, use of 205 conductors 5 Constantini, Claudio 142 contraction 17 convergence 11, 15 Córdoba, Abel 34 Cortázar, Julio 169 countermelody 17, 26, 63, 65, 69, 110, 225, 235, 236 counterpoint 23, 24, 26, 66, 161, 204, 228 criollo 28, 32 cuadrado 14, 21, 47, 99 Curso de tango 45, 74, 76, 109 D’Arienzo, Juan 5, 6, 109; orchestras of 96, 109, 211 De Angelis 45; orchestras of 211 ‘Decalogue’ 115 De Caro, Emilio 28 De Caro, Francisco 4, 10, 29, 31, 32, 71, 114 De Caro, Julio: Boedo 23–29; El monito 27; new forms 10; and Pugliese 31–32, 71; radical change 4; violin style 29 De Caro school 23, 28–29, 44, 114, 125 decontextualization 204 De Lío, Ubaldo 73 Del Priore, Oscar 6, 44, 51, 63 Díaz, Kicho 74, 114, 116 Dido and Aeneas 102 Di Sarli, Carlos 4, 6, 18 dissonances 31, 49, 72 distribution of the melodic line 68, 205–206 divergence 11, 15, 39, 51, 98 Domínguez, Raúl 34 Don Agustín Bardi 72; analysis of 76–95; score 78, 79–80, 81, 83, 84, 86, 87–89, 91–93

247

Dos virtuosos del piano 74 double bass 19, 29 double syncopation 13 El andariego 36–43 El bosque mágico 74 El Club del Clan 6 El entrerriano: accompanimental models 213–214; formal structure 211–213, 212; melodic features 215; orchestration 214–215; structure 210–211 El monito 27 Encuentro 74, 119, 121, 143; analysis of 182–187; score 181 ensembles 33–34; of Beytelmann 169–170; of Piazzolla 114–115, 116–117; of Pugliese 30–31; of Salgán 72–74 ensemble writing 161 Época de oro 3, 4; of tango 20, 65, 72 exceptions 10 expansion 17 Federico, Domingo 168, 207n1 Federico, Leopoldo 7, 32, 73, 74, 119, 170, 191, 208n4 Ferro, Rafael 74 Fessel, Pablo 15 Firpo, Roberto 71 Flores, Carlos 31 Flores, Geroni 4 folklore 32, 70–71, 75, 106; Argentinian 100, 119, 168, 219, 232 foreground layers 27, 36, 76, 110, 119, 138, 171, 223 form 75; in tango music 18–19 formal features 227, 231 formal scheme 66, 159–162; of Adiós Nonino 147; Beytelmann’s arrangement of La bordona 193; of Don Agustín Bardi 77; of Negracha 50; of Otras voces 174; of Piazzolla’s arrangement 212; of Pugliese’s arrangement 212; of Salgán’s arrangement 212; of Tres minutos con la realidad 128 formal structure 105–106, 174, 177–181, 203, 211–213 fragmentation 18; of the melodic line 225; of phrases and semi-phrases 68; of rhythmical accompaniment 206–207; of two semi-phrases 98 Francia, Manlio 28 Francini, Enrique Mario 73

248

Index

Francini-Pontier orchestra 7, 23, 192, 211 fraseo/fraseado (phrased) 13–14, 18–19, 65, 162 Fresedo, Osvaldo 4 Fuimos 45, 150 García Brunelli, O. 4, 127 Gallo ciego 50, 76 Gardel, Carlos 3, 113, 150 Gardel school 28 Garello, Raúl 50 gauchos 11 Ginastera, Alberto 113–114, 120, 165n9 Gobbi, Alfredo 28, 31, 32; El andariego 36–43; influence on Piazzolla 139, 141; new forms 4 Golden Age see Época de oro golpes de caja 19 Goñi, Orlando 28, 114, 141, 144 Gran Hotel Victoria 109; analysis of 95–100; arrangement of 100, 110, 220; melodic theme of 95 Griseta 45 Guardia nueva 3 Guardia vieja 3, 23, 76, 108 Guinot, Lucas 24, 25 guitar 99; cadenza 186; diverse bordoneos on 123; electric 115, 122, 124, 162, 213, 214; solos 214; use of 107 Gustavo Beytelmann Trio 170 habanera 11 harmony 15, 233; harmonic progressions 106; introduction 218; in Milonga del ángel 121 Herrero, Oscar 34 history of tango 3–8, 73; duration of solos 160; La bordona in 191; quintet 116–117 Homenaje 70–71, 103; as thematic material 102 Homenaje a Pedro Laurenz 74, 192; analysis of 101–105; variación in 108 Hotel Victoria see Gran Hotel Victoria Huerta, Bautista 34 imitation: contrapuntal 41; motivic 204; use of 68 instrumental density 17, 80, 221; changes in 162, 205; increase in 17, 36, 62, 79, 145, 185, 198, 219; reduction in 17, 36, 56, 85, 145, 197, 222 instrumentation: in Beytelmann's work 170, 173, 179, 180, 182, 184, 190, 197,

203, 205–206; in Boedo 25, 26, 27; in El andariego 215, 220, 221; in Más, muchísimo más 224, 225; in Piazzolla's work 123, 134, 141, 147, 161, 162; in Pugliese's work 36, 46, 47, 68; in Salgán's work 96, 105, 108; sequential process 236 interval class 62, 63, 64, 171, 178, 203; melody 218; organization of musical material by 16; thematic relations 181; upbeat figures and 51 inversion 16, 56, 78, 188, 220; of melodic line 222–223; of strings and bandoneons 107 Kröpfl, Francisco 168, 207n2 Kuschevatzky, Santiago 34 Kuss, Malena 127 La bordona 169, 203, 205, 207; analysis of 191–200; score 193, 194, 195, 196, 197–198, 199–200, 201–202 La Cachila 13, 180 La Casa del Tango 34 La clavada 72, 110 La cumparsita 170 La llamo silbando 13, 72 La mariposa: Maffia, Pedro 36; Pugliese, Osvaldo 43–49; 103, 203, 213, 219; score of 66 Lanóo, Enrique 34 La rayuela 32 Latasa, Feliciano 95; Gran Hotel Victoria 75 látigo 19 Laurenz, Pedro 28, 31, 35, 74, 101–105, 106, 107, 110, 114, 192 Lavallén, Víctor 34 La viruta 37 La yumba 35, 63, 141 Les Archers de Darius 187 Link, K. 24, 40, 49, 74, 75, 90 lunfardo 165n18 Maciel, Jorge 34 Maffia, Pedro 28, 31, 32; La mariposa 36, 43–49; and Pugliese 43–44 Malandraca 35 Mandarino, Amadeo 33 marcato 11, 12–13, 14, 36; connection of 109; non-pitched 164; in Otras voces 176; segments of 90, 94; traditional 164; typical 164; in yumba 66 Marcelli, Mauricio 32, 34, 36, 37, 62 Marconi, Néstor 7, 45

Index María de Buenos Aires 117, 151 Más, muchísimo más 224–227, 229 Mederos, Rodolfo 7, 34 melody/melodic: and accompaniment 235; and articulations 14; in Beytelmann's work 182–183, 204, 205–206; distribution of the melodic line 68; in El entrerriano 215; in Negracha 50; in Piazzolla's work 159, 160, 161, 231; in Pugliese's work 231; in Salgán's work 105–106, 110; as tango trait 31; as textural layer 15; in Varassi Pega’s work 218, 227–228 Mendizábal, Rosendo 209, 210; El entrerriano 209–215 meter 66–67, 108–109, 163–164, 206–207, 229, 233–235 metric alternation 36–37, 66, 233 milonga 11, 31, 50, 164; bordoneo 125; campera 11, 119, 124; ciudadana 11, 120, 224 Milonga del ángel, analysis of 119–126; harmonic features in 121; innovative features 119; patterns 120; themes in 121, 150 Milonga triste 119 milonguero trait 31 model 10–11 modulation 42–43, 101, 121, 126, 142, 163; beat 173–174, 206; Piazzolla and Beytelmann 233 monothematic form 65–66, 232; in tango 50; use of 118, 160 Mosalini-Beytelmann-Caratini trio 169, 171 Mosalini, Juan José 6, 7, 34, 169 motive 18, 36, 38–40, 46, 65, 66, 68, 161 Murtagh, Omar 34, 74 Negracha 35, 36, 65–67; analysis of 49–62; score 52, 53–55, 57–60 New Guard see Guardia nueva nomad tango 169 norms, stylistic 7, 9; ‘model’, the 10–11; of tango music 11–21; variation 85 Novati, J. 12 Nudler, Julio 28 Nuevo Quinteto Real 74, 75, 95 Octeto Buenos Aires 23, 74, 115, 210 Old Guard see Guardia vieja open ending 19, 36, 62, 65, 66, 233 Oratorio Carlos Gardel 75 orchestras 5; see also ensembles

249

orchestration 107–109, 162, 205–206, 214–215, 229, 236–237 ornaments 75; use of 106, 204 Orquesta del Tango de Buenos Aires 50 orquesta típica 4; conductor's role 5; disappearance of 6; piano in 71; and Pugliese 31; and Salgán 71–72, 108 Ortiz, Ciriaco 31, 73, 103 ostinatos 138, 160, 203; motives and 118, 125, 232; strings with underlying rhythmical 63; rhythmical 141, 144 Otras voces: analysis of 172–181; Beytelmann structures 206; formal structure 174; score 175–177, 178 Pampa, the 32 parametric instability-stability 67, 109, 162, 206, 237 payadores 11 Pelinsky, Ramón 151, 169 Penón, Arturo 34 Peralta, Julián 210 percussive effects 2, 10, 19–20, 62, 64, 172, 207; for tango 239; use of 164; on violin 19 performance techniques 239 permutation 219 Perrotti, Editorial 96 Petrucelli, Luis 28 Piana, Sebastián 119 piano 3–5, 8, 20, 29, 95, 104, 124, 134, 187, 194, 205; bass line, thickening of 109, 207; concertante 107; original score 38–39; published score 40, 41, 45, 48; register 108; solos 20, 85, 122, 205; textural layers 188–189; timbral and percussive effects on 19 Piazzolla, Astor: Adiós Nonino 146–159; analysis of works 118–119; approach to music 115–116; contribution to tango 239; ‘Decalogue’ 115–116; El entrerriano 209–215, 212; formal, textural and melodic features 159–162; on Gobbi 37; harmony 233; his life 112–118; and jazz 10; on La mariposa 45; María de Buenos Aires 117; melody/melodic 231; Milonga del ángel 119–126; musicians he worked with 112–113; new forms 4, 7, 8, 10; orchestration 162; Pedro y Pedro 28; and phrasing 13; on Pugliese 33, 35; quintets 116–117; Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi 25, 139–146; and Salgán 73; Sinfonía de Buenos 115; style of

250

Index

118–119, 121, 231; stylistic norms 141; Tres minutos con la realidad 127–139; variation techniques 162–163 Piazzolla, Diana 141 Pin 217–220 pitch system xvii, 204 Plaza, Julián 34, 36, 44, 208n5 Pollet, Enrique 31 polyphony of structural elements 42 polyrhythm 36, 62, 61, 66, 67, 119, 123, 163–164, 207, 229, 233 polytonality 204 porteño 3, 32 Preludio n. 1 171, 187–191, 206, 208n6 Pugliese, Osvaldo 6, 8; analysis of works 36; on Beytelmann 170; ‘composers’ orchestra 33–34; contribution to tango 240; El andariego 36–43; El entrerriano 209–215, 212; formal and melodic features 65–66; harmony 233; his life 30–33; La mariposa 43–49; La yumba 35; A los artistas plásticos 36, 62–65; Malandraca 35; and marcato 12, 66; melody/melodic 231; Negracha 35, 36, 49–62; new forms 4, 7; open ending 19; politics of 34; Recuerdo 35, 110; rhythm and meter 66–67; style of 31, 33, 65–69; variation techniques 67–68; works of 35; and yum 13 Purcell, Henry 102 Quinteto Real 7, 73–74, 95, 101 recapitulations 109, 119, 125, 138, 185, 203 recording 6, 37, 44, 51, 63, 74, 77, 110n7, 123, 127, 147, 217, 221, 224 re-creation 20–21, 44, 192 Recuerdo 35, 49, 110, 179 register 10, 26, 38, 96, 105, 108, 126, 204; arrangement 178; high 97, 126; medium-low 49, 134, 143; middle 98; use of 108, 204, 238 registral amplitude 17, 64 repertoire 5, 31, 113, 117 Retrato de Alfredo Gobbi 25, 109, 118, 161–164, 205, 220, 221; analysis of 139–146; score 140 rhythmical base 11, 15, 36, 42, 56, 63, 66, 67, 99, 124, 126, 146, 180, 214, 223, 235, 239; asynchrony in changes 109; in Boedo 25; interruption of 109; in Piazzolla's work 163; in relation to

musical syntax 67; in Salgán's work 96, 109; theme vs. 150, 163; in yumba 65 rhythmical complementarity 36, 67, 235 rhythmical density 17, 145, 146, 215 rhythm/rhythmical 26, 50; and articulations 14; in Beytelmann's work 206–207, 234, 235; marcato models 12–13; and meter 66–67, 108–109, 163–164, 206–207, 229, 233; milonga 11, 124–126, 164, 225; milonga campera 119–120, 123; in Piazzolla's work 160, 161, 163–164, 233–234, 235; in Pugliese's work 66–67, 233, 235; in Salgán's work 108–110; tango 11, 161; as tango trait 31; types of 11; vals criollo 217; in Varassi Pega’s work 229; variación 17; waltz 217–218 ripieno 15, 16–17, 45, 153, 225, 226, 232, 236 Rivero, Edmundo 72–73 River Plate 2, 3, 240 Rodríguez, Edgardo 128 Romano, Fernando 34 Rossi, Aniceto 33–35 rubato 3, 14, 36, 40, 67 Rubí 17 Ruggiero, Osvaldo 33–35, 51 Salas, Horacio 4 Salgán-De Lío duo 7, 73, 74, 95 Salgán, Horacio 7, 8, 45; analysis of works 75–76; Aquellos tangos camperos 70; contribution to tango 239; Curso de tango 74; Don Agustín Bardi 72, 76–95; Dos virtuosos del piano 74; El bosque mágico 74; El entrerriano 209–215, 212; Gran Hotel Victoria 95–100; harmony 233; Homenaje 70–71; Homenaje a Pedro Laurenz 74, 101–105; La clavada 72; La llamo silbando 72; life of 70–75; and marcato 13; milonga campera 119–120; new forms 4, 7; Oratorio Carlos Gardel 75; and phrasing 14; style of 71, 72, 90, 94, 95, 98, 101–102, 105–110; and syncopation 13 Scaramuzza, Vincenzo 71 scores 21 segmentation 18, 23, 40, 82, 105, 106, 202–203, 227 Selles, Roberto 95 sequential process 68 sextet 4

Index Sexteto Tango 34 Sinfonía de Buenos 115 soli 16, 64, 211, 214 solo 16, 160; bandoneon 103, 144, 197–198; guitar 182; piano solo 25, 147, 223; two-hands piano solo 20, 48, 122; violin solo 27, 144 Spivak, Raúl 112 Stampone, Atilio 6, 35, 170, 208n5 strappata 19 structure 16, 65, 211–213 stylistic norms, of tango music; creating and re-creating 20–21; development in 11; form in 18–19; milonga 11; model 10–11; patterns 12–13; rhythmical base 11; rhythmical models 12; scores 21; syncopation 13; tango 11; textural analysis 15; timbral and percussive effects 19–20; vals criollo 11 S-W structure 11, 213, 229, 235 syncopation 13, 75, 77–78, 90, 98–100, 108, 213 systematization of new forms 10, 164 tambor 19 Tango a la Duke 170 Tango Argentino 7 tessitura 17; expansion of 107, 132, 219, 238; restricted 26, 121, 162, 238; widest 126, 179 textural density 17 textural layers 15–17, 36, 37, 66, 97, 107, 161, 204, 228, 235–236 textural recapitulation 182, 203 thematic generalization 36, 38, 65, 160, 171, 203–204, 232 thematic variation 18, 41, 110, 227–228 thematization 142, 163, 220, 238 theme 15–16, 36, 65, 106, 110, 121, 163 Thompson, Leopoldo 28 Tiempo Argentino 169 timbre/timbral 19–20, 78, 164, 239 tonality xvii, 163 transcription 24, 37, 44, 51, 63, 95, 96, 102, 127, 142, 147, 185, 192 transposed/transposition: in Piazzolla's work 127, 128, 143, 160, 161, 162, 238; in Salgán's work 76, 110

251

Tres minutos con la realidad 127–139; score 128, 129–133, 135, 136, 137, 138 Troilo, Aníbal 6, 28, 31, 32, 37; new forms 4; and phrasing 13; and Piazzolla 112; on Salgán 74 Tursky, Jaime 33 tutti 16 two-hands piano solo 20 umpa-umpa 13, 72, 97, 99, 108, 233 Ursini, Sonia 73, 102 vals criollo 11, 217, 229 Varassi Pega, Bárbara 216–229; Al artesano 220–224, 227; formal features 227; Más, muchísimo más 224–227; melody/melodic 218, 227–228; orchestration 229; Pin 217–220; rhythm and meter 229; textural layers 228 Vardaro, Elvino 30, 37, 113 Vardaro-Pugliese sextet 30 variación 17, 90, 105, 201, 215 variation techniques 237–238; ambiguity 18, 68, 163; in Beytelmann's work 206; distribution of the melodic line 68; fragmentation 68; fraseo/fraseado (phrased) 13; in Gran Hotel Victoria 97; imitation 68; instrumental density 17; modulation 162; motive 68; parametric instability-stability 67, 162, 206; in parametric stability 109; in Piazzolla's work 162–163; and the pulse 11; recapitulations 109; registral amplitude 17; rhythmical density 17; in Salgán's work 109; sequential process 68; structural feature 68; tessitura 17; textural density 17; textural recapitulation 182; tonality 163 Vicente, Carlos 4 Villoldo, Ángel 3, 95, 111n8 violin 19, 29 violin-cornet 29 Wendland, K. 24, 40, 49, 74, 75, 90 Wyman, Mark 96 yumba 12, 32, 36, 66 Yunta brava 95, 110n7