7 Philippe Manoury's Jupiter1

152 • Andrew May
When the fl utist plays a note, the pitch-tracking algorithm determines its
pitch as quickly as possible. Th e score-following algorithm then correlates
this pitch number with the pitch list in the follow score. Some pitch events
will trigger cues, while others will simply be counted and registered by the
score follower. If a new cue has been reached, the score follower sends out
the messages in the qlist score corresponding to that cue. 2 Since cues can
be fl exibly assigned to notes, the computer’s accompaniment can be more
or less detailed and more or less correlated with the fl ute part, according to
the needs of the music.
Th e pitch datum generated at the beginning of a note (henceforth the
“note-incipit”) is the computer’s only connection to the fl utist’s behavior. All
other data that could be used to control the computer such as amplitudes,
durations, and rests, are ignored. Furthermore, within the linear progression
of the computer’s follow and qlist scores, backtracking in time is impossible.
Th ere is no provision for random access, or “skipping” to another cue in the
score. Th e computer is only cognizant of note-incipits, and its sounds are
frequently triggered in reaction to them. Cort Lippe has commented on the
pitfalls of this model: “A common observation . . . is that real-time computer
music has a static performer/machine relationship, one in which the computer
always reacts to or transforms materials generated by a performer . . . a kind
of ‘call and response’ relationship” (1996 116).
In Jupiter, several strategies are used to avoid a static relationship between
fl ute and computer. Th e strategy of pitch-based score-following triggers systems
that create varying degrees of temporal independence in the computer’s
behaviors, yielding a much more dynamic performative relationship than the
note-incipit model of the fl ute’s actions would suggest. Th e varying tactics of
the computer’s relationship to the fl ute are carried out within the qlist itself
as well as within a host of specialized modules in the patch.
Each of the computer’s instruments has not only a characteristic timbre,
but also a characteristic relationship to the fl ute line. Th e fundamental tactics
of relation may be divided into four basic categories: temporal extension (TX),
rhythmic activation (RA), sonic extension (SX), and harmonic extension
(HX), each defi ned below. All four are used in various ways from the start of
the work to the end. Th ree further tactics of relation, introduced in particular
sections of the work, will be discussed later; these are motoric coordination
(MC), independent behaviors (IB), and spectral dynamics (SD).
Temporal Extension (TX): Notes growing out of the fl ute line are extended
in time, generating a separate and slower rhythmic layer. Th is is oft en accomplished
by the injection of fl ute sound into the infi nite reverberator,
which prolongs them until some later point in time (usually another cue
from the fl ute).
Simoni_RT76294_C007.indd 152 9/22/2005 11:19:18 AM