CSM 07: Petra String Quartet / Cubbin / Bolton
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/1885/733714668
Browse
Recent Submissions
Item Open Access Peter Tahourdin: Quartet For Strings (1982) - Movement III(Canberra School of Music, Australian National University, 1982) Composer: Peter Tahourdin; Davies, John"The Quartet for Strings represents the European aspect of my work. The title (it is not called 'String Quartet') indicates the structural basis of the work and has its roots in the Dialogues I composed in the 1970s for various duo combinations. These dialogues spring from the notion that musicians playing together may exchange ideas rather in the manner of people in conversation. The quartet simply becomes a more elaborate form of exchange than the dialogue - a conversation between four musicians instead of two. The first four bars of the quartet present the germ from which the work grows, together with the pitch material and aspects of sonority and articulation that are central to it. This germinal idea recurs in varied form, twice in the first movement and just before the coda that ends the quartet. The initial presentation of the pitch material reveals a twelve tone row. It is not used in accordance with conventional serial practice, however, but rather as a vocabulary of intervals that underpin the melody and harmony, providing stylistic unity and coherence. The quartet is in three movements, linked together by sustained high notes which are derived from the opening four bars. These links help to maintain the conversational flow and, in so doing, prevent the break in continuity that so often occurs between movements. The first movement is in five segments -A B C B A - fast, moderate and slow, then returning in reverse order; it is perhaps the least traditional of the three. The second movement is slow and lyrical, maintaining the process of dialogue. The instruments enter successively, beginning with the cello. They then group in pairs, in threes, and finally all four join together to build the central climax. This is followed by a return to the material of the central, slow section of the first movement. The music then winds down, the instruments departing as they had entered, leaving the first violin alone on the final high note. If the first movement is the least traditional in its form, the third and last movement is the most. A sequence of contrasting ideas unfolds in a uniformly fast tempo. Ideas move between the instruments, grouping and regrouping in different formations as the material is developed and elaborated, leading to the return to the germinal idea that began the quartet, and so to the final, brief coda." -- Peter TahourdinItem Open Access Don Kay: Three Canzonas For Flute And Viola (1972) - Canzona III(Canberra School of Music, Australian National University, 1972) Composer: Don Kay; Davies, John"The second of the three pieces was the first to be composed. Jan Sedivka suggested writing a flute piece in combination with viola for two advanced students at the Tasmanian Conservatoriun of Music in 1972, Phillipa Secomb and Keith Cretlin. It was originally performed in Melbourne by Phillipa and Keith at a Moomba Festival concert presented by students of Australian conservatoria and university music departments in 1972. The first and third canzonas were written especially for David Cubbin and Peter Komlos who had both played in the first performance of my flute quintet in Adelaide in 1974. Their effo1ts with that piece so impressed me that I felt inspired to write two more canzonas, with them in mind, when Peter indicated he was looking for suitable new music for a Hobart concert. They gave the first complete performance of the Three Canzonas at Hobart Town Hall in 1975. Each canzona, can be performed separately, but if played in sequence they should be in the order presented in this performance. They are intended to be complementary to each other rather than rigorously unified. Whereas the two instruments play fairly equal roles in Canzona,s 1 and 3, Canzona, 2 has a longish section where the flute extends and stretches the material almost beyond endurance over a long held pedal E on the viola. This section is framed by a modally inclined meditative section, which emerges from a busy dialogue, characterised by strongly marked rhythmic counterpoints punctuated by moments of quiet reflection. Canzona 1 has a certain strident quality relieved by a slow section including an almost oriental sounding flute melody accompanied by four note pizzicato chords, before the instrumental roles are reversed. Like Canzona 2, this piece concludes quietly, but on an unresolved chord of D flat, G and C. Shorter than the preceding pieces, Canzona 3 is also the most constantly active and technically demanding, with each instrument busily joining in quick unison passages orresponding to the other, like two interacting insects. Various instrumental effects are used to heighten the feeling of busy and unpredictable dialogue. A fast staccato unison melody which appears quite early returns at an increased speed which threatens to break out uncontrollably before slowing and mellowing, briefly gathering speed again, then quietly dissolving." -- Don KayItem Open Access Don Kay: Three Canzonas For Flute And Viola (1972) - Canzona II(Canberra School of Music, Australian National University, 1972) Composer: Don Kay; Davies, John"The second of the three pieces was the first to be composed. Jan Sedivka suggested writing a flute piece in combination with viola for two advanced students at the Tasmanian Conservatoriun of Music in 1972, Phillipa Secomb and Keith Cretlin. It was originally performed in Melbourne by Phillipa and Keith at a Moomba Festival concert presented by students of Australian conservatoria and university music departments in 1972. The first and third canzonas were written especially for David Cubbin and Peter Komlos who had both played in the first performance of my flute quintet in Adelaide in 1974. Their effo1ts with that piece so impressed me that I felt inspired to write two more canzonas, with them in mind, when Peter indicated he was looking for suitable new music for a Hobart concert. They gave the first complete performance of the Three Canzonas at Hobart Town Hall in 1975. Each canzona, can be performed separately, but if played in sequence they should be in the order presented in this performance. They are intended to be complementary to each other rather than rigorously unified. Whereas the two instruments play fairly equal roles in Canzona,s 1 and 3, Canzona, 2 has a longish section where the flute extends and stretches the material almost beyond endurance over a long held pedal E on the viola. This section is framed by a modally inclined meditative section, which emerges from a busy dialogue, characterised by strongly marked rhythmic counterpoints punctuated by moments of quiet reflection. Canzona 1 has a certain strident quality relieved by a slow section including an almost oriental sounding flute melody accompanied by four note pizzicato chords, before the instrumental roles are reversed. Like Canzona 2, this piece concludes quietly, but on an unresolved chord of D flat, G and C. Shorter than the preceding pieces, Canzona 3 is also the most constantly active and technically demanding, with each instrument busily joining in quick unison passages orresponding to the other, like two interacting insects. Various instrumental effects are used to heighten the feeling of busy and unpredictable dialogue. A fast staccato unison melody which appears quite early returns at an increased speed which threatens to break out uncontrollably before slowing and mellowing, briefly gathering speed again, then quietly dissolving." -- Don KayItem Open Access Don Kay: Three Canzonas For Flute And Viola (1972) - Canzona I(Canberra School of Music, Australian National University, 1972) Composer: Don Kay; Davies, John"The second of the three pieces was the first to be composed. Jan Sedivka suggested writing a flute piece in combination with viola for two advanced students at the Tasmanian Conservatoriun of Music in 1972, Phillipa Secomb and Keith Cretlin. It was originally performed in Melbourne by Phillipa and Keith at a Moomba Festival concert presented by students of Australian conservatoria and university music departments in 1972. The first and third canzonas were written especially for David Cubbin and Peter Komlos who had both played in the first performance of my flute quintet in Adelaide in 1974. Their effo1ts with that piece so impressed me that I felt inspired to write two more canzonas, with them in mind, when Peter indicated he was looking for suitable new music for a Hobart concert. They gave the first complete performance of the Three Canzonas at Hobart Town Hall in 1975. Each canzona, can be performed separately, but if played in sequence they should be in the order presented in this performance. They are intended to be complementary to each other rather than rigorously unified. Whereas the two instruments play fairly equal roles in Canzona,s 1 and 3, Canzona, 2 has a longish section where the flute extends and stretches the material almost beyond endurance over a long held pedal E on the viola. This section is framed by a modally inclined meditative section, which emerges from a busy dialogue, characterised by strongly marked rhythmic counterpoints punctuated by moments of quiet reflection. Canzona 1 has a certain strident quality relieved by a slow section including an almost oriental sounding flute melody accompanied by four note pizzicato chords, before the instrumental roles are reversed. Like Canzona 2, this piece concludes quietly, but on an unresolved chord of D flat, G and C. Shorter than the preceding pieces, Canzona 3 is also the most constantly active and technically demanding, with each instrument busily joining in quick unison passages orresponding to the other, like two interacting insects. Various instrumental effects are used to heighten the feeling of busy and unpredictable dialogue. A fast staccato unison melody which appears quite early returns at an increased speed which threatens to break out uncontrollably before slowing and mellowing, briefly gathering speed again, then quietly dissolving." -- Don KayItem Open Access Peter Tahourdin: Quartet For Strings (1982) - Movement II(Canberra School of Music, Australian National University, 1982) Composer: Peter Tahourdin; Davies, John"The Quartet for Strings represents the European aspect of my work. The title (it is not called 'String Quartet') indicates the structural basis of the work and has its roots in the Dialogues I composed in the 1970s for various duo combinations. These dialogues spring from the notion that musicians playing together may exchange ideas rather in the manner of people in conversation. The quartet simply becomes a more elaborate form of exchange than the dialogue - a conversation between four musicians instead of two. The first four bars of the quartet present the germ from which the work grows, together with the pitch material and aspects of sonority and articulation that are central to it. This germinal idea recurs in varied form, twice in the first movement and just before the coda that ends the quartet. The initial presentation of the pitch material reveals a twelve tone row. It is not used in accordance with conventional serial practice, however, but rather as a vocabulary of intervals that underpin the melody and harmony, providing stylistic unity and coherence. The quartet is in three movements, linked together by sustained high notes which are derived from the opening four bars. These links help to maintain the conversational flow and, in so doing, prevent the break in continuity that so often occurs between movements. The first movement is in five segments -A B C B A - fast, moderate and slow, then returning in reverse order; it is perhaps the least traditional of the three. The second movement is slow and lyrical, maintaining the process of dialogue. The instruments enter successively, beginning with the cello. They then group in pairs, in threes, and finally all four join together to build the central climax. This is followed by a return to the material of the central, slow section of the first movement. The music then winds down, the instruments departing as they had entered, leaving the first violin alone on the final high note. If the first movement is the least traditional in its form, the third and last movement is the most. A sequence of contrasting ideas unfolds in a uniformly fast tempo. Ideas move between the instruments, grouping and regrouping in different formations as the material is developed and elaborated, leading to the return to the germinal idea that began the quartet, and so to the final, brief coda." -- Peter TahourdinItem Open Access Peter Tahourdin: Quartet For Strings (1982) - Movement I(Canberra School of Music, Australian National University, 1982) Composer: Peter Tahourdin; Davies, John"The Quartet for Strings represents the European aspect of my work. The title (it is not called 'String Quartet') indicates the structural basis of the work and has its roots in the Dialogues I composed in the 1970s for various duo combinations. These dialogues spring from the notion that musicians playing together may exchange ideas rather in the manner of people in conversation. The quartet simply becomes a more elaborate form of exchange than the dialogue - a conversation between four musicians instead of two. The first four bars of the quartet present the germ from which the work grows, together with the pitch material and aspects of sonority and articulation that are central to it. This germinal idea recurs in varied form, twice in the first movement and just before the coda that ends the quartet. The initial presentation of the pitch material reveals a twelve tone row. It is not used in accordance with conventional serial practice, however, but rather as a vocabulary of intervals that underpin the melody and harmony, providing stylistic unity and coherence. The quartet is in three movements, linked together by sustained high notes which are derived from the opening four bars. These links help to maintain the conversational flow and, in so doing, prevent the break in continuity that so often occurs between movements. The first movement is in five segments -A B C B A - fast, moderate and slow, then returning in reverse order; it is perhaps the least traditional of the three. The second movement is slow and lyrical, maintaining the process of dialogue. The instruments enter successively, beginning with the cello. They then group in pairs, in threes, and finally all four join together to build the central climax. This is followed by a return to the material of the central, slow section of the first movement. The music then winds down, the instruments departing as they had entered, leaving the first violin alone on the final high note. If the first movement is the least traditional in its form, the third and last movement is the most. A sequence of contrasting ideas unfolds in a uniformly fast tempo. Ideas move between the instruments, grouping and regrouping in different formations as the material is developed and elaborated, leading to the return to the germinal idea that began the quartet, and so to the final, brief coda." -- Peter TahourdinItem Open Access Margaret Sutherland: String Quartet No. 1 (1939?) - I. Allegro Risoluto(Canberra School of Music, Australian National University, 1939) Composer: Margaret Sutherland; Davies, John"In its broad outlines, Sutherland's first tring quartet adheres closely to the classical model in spirit and structure. Like so many of her European contemporaries, Sutherland saw the well established formula as a convenient and appropriate vehicle for' absolute' music, recognising perhaps that a new-tonal idiom cast in old - forms is likely to be more readily comprehensible: certainly Debussy, Ravel and Bartok had already demonstrated the flexibility of the genre. A striking feature of this quartet, given its context, is its tonal idiom. The work was composed in Australia at a time when Australian musicians had scant acquaintance with avant-garde developments in Europe. Sutherland's extreme chromaticism and the idiom are handled with confidence and precision throughout: a remarkable feat, when the composer's limited access to scores and performances of the new music is considered. The first movement adopts the sonata structure of the classical quartet, even to the point of tonal adjustment in the recapitulation to enable satisfactory resolution of tension. The thematic material is motivic rather than melodic in nature. The three primary motives, (a), (b) and (c) all have associated countersubjects and variants. many of which are interrelated (see Figure 22). Motive (a) serves as an introduction, a call to order; its characteristic rhythm appears throughout the movement and indeed throughout the work. Its countersubject, (a)1, characterised by a descending semitone figure, will be enlarged upon in the countersubject to motive (c); (a), (b), (b)1 and (c) are clearly related in their use of an ascending major or minor third. Sutherland's use of variant motives ((b)2 and (c)3) and her fragmentation of material occasionally make it difficult for the listener to discern the identity of motives: the distinguishing feature is often the characteristic rhythm of each, for example the dotted rhythm of (a), the triplets of (b)1, the semiquavers of (c)2 and the ornamental semiquaver triplets of (c)3. Apparent from the outset is the closely woven texture, achieved by imitation and other contrapuntal techniques. In bars 1-3 we see motive (a) stated consecutively by three instruments, its countersubject (a)1 stated in part by violin 2 in bar 1, in full in bars 2-3 by violin 1 and in a variant, augmented form by the cello. This type of texture is continued throughout, resulting in a high degree of cohesion and musical logic. Motives (a) and (b) might be considered first subject material; following a brief transition of (a) and (b) combined, the second subject group, motive (c) and its variants, follows. The end of the exposition is marked by a descending fourth in the viola at bars 55-6, a figure whose significance becomes apparent later on. The development section involves the fragmentation and simultaneous statement of motivic material, beginning with (c).At bar 94 the descending fourth figure is restated, this time more clearly, in the cello part, signalling the approaching end of development and the return of original material. This figure, derived originally from motive (a), is emphasised throughout the development section. Its derivation is clarified in bar 79 by the cello, and the following melodic development by violin 1 resembles (b)2, but is based almost exclusively on the interval of a fourth. At bar 112, (a) and (a)1 return, both transposed up a perfect fourth; (b) and (b)1 follow, transposed up a perfect fourth and fifth respectively, creating a less dissonant effect than the original statement (see Figure 23). There follows an abbreviated statement of (c) transposed up a perfect fifth, an adjustment to the lower parts again giving a sense of relative consonance. The movement ends with the strongly rhythmical (c)3 and a reiterated C major triad. The second movement provides respite from the complex motivic workings of the first. There are only two significant themes, the second of which is simply a series of falling fifths (see Figure 24). This movement is dominated by falling motives, in contrast with the upward slant of much first movement material; the themes are less chromatic, textures are less dense and the tempo (adagio) more leisurely. The triplet and dotted rhythms, and a possible thematic relationship between the second theme and motive (c) of the first movement, provide continuity. As might be expected, the structure is ternary, the middle section beginning at bar 57 with a cello solo ( compare the cello recitative at the end of the development of the first movement) and ending at bar 108 with a stretto pedal point and a general pause. The third movement is a scherzo, reminiscent of Beethoven in its witty rhythmic ambiguity and folklike character. Its structure is best described as a rondo, with hints of a trio section around bar 244. Although the finale is freer in form than the first 'movement,' elerrierits of sonata structure are discernible, particularly the apparent development of material that begins at bar 104 and the etum of original material at bar 182. This is the most 'modem' of the movements, with more use of imitation, and elements of Bartok's style occasionally audible in the ostina,to passages, the modal thematic structure and ornamentation. The modal and antiphonal nature of the first subject is perhaps the clearest indication of this influence (see Figure 25). To audiences acquainted with little, if any, music of this century, Sutherland's quartet must have appeared shocking. At a time when many of her younger contemporaries were perpetuating t.lie post-rom~ntic idiom, Sutherland was developing a style which, while revealing affinities with the music of Debussy, Ravel and Bartok, is wholly her own. Contemporary composition in Australia owes much to this composer, who was among the first to come to terms with the musical language of the twentieth century." -- Deborah CrispItem Open Access Margaret Sutherland: String Quartet No. 1 (1939?) - III. Scherzo(Canberra School of Music, Australian National University, 1939) Composer: Margaret Sutherland; Davies, John"In its broad outlines, Sutherland's first tring quartet adheres closely to the classical model in spirit and structure. Like so many of her European contemporaries, Sutherland saw the well established formula as a convenient and appropriate vehicle for' absolute' music, recognising perhaps that a new-tonal idiom cast in old - forms is likely to be more readily comprehensible: certainly Debussy, Ravel and Bartok had already demonstrated the flexibility of the genre. A striking feature of this quartet, given its context, is its tonal idiom. The work was composed in Australia at a time when Australian musicians had scant acquaintance with avant-garde developments in Europe. Sutherland's extreme chromaticism and the idiom are handled with confidence and precision throughout: a remarkable feat, when the composer's limited access to scores and performances of the new music is considered. The first movement adopts the sonata structure of the classical quartet, even to the point of tonal adjustment in the recapitulation to enable satisfactory resolution of tension. The thematic material is motivic rather than melodic in nature. The three primary motives, (a), (b) and (c) all have associated countersubjects and variants. many of which are interrelated (see Figure 22). Motive (a) serves as an introduction, a call to order; its characteristic rhythm appears throughout the movement and indeed throughout the work. Its countersubject, (a)1, characterised by a descending semitone figure, will be enlarged upon in the countersubject to motive (c); (a), (b), (b)1 and (c) are clearly related in their use of an ascending major or minor third. Sutherland's use of variant motives ((b)2 and (c)3) and her fragmentation of material occasionally make it difficult for the listener to discern the identity of motives: the distinguishing feature is often the characteristic rhythm of each, for example the dotted rhythm of (a), the triplets of (b)1, the semiquavers of (c)2 and the ornamental semiquaver triplets of (c)3. Apparent from the outset is the closely woven texture, achieved by imitation and other contrapuntal techniques. In bars 1-3 we see motive (a) stated consecutively by three instruments, its countersubject (a)1 stated in part by violin 2 in bar 1, in full in bars 2-3 by violin 1 and in a variant, augmented form by the cello. This type of texture is continued throughout, resulting in a high degree of cohesion and musical logic. Motives (a) and (b) might be considered first subject material; following a brief transition of (a) and (b) combined, the second subject group, motive (c) and its variants, follows. The end of the exposition is marked by a descending fourth in the viola at bars 55-6, a figure whose significance becomes apparent later on. The development section involves the fragmentation and simultaneous statement of motivic material, beginning with (c).At bar 94 the descending fourth figure is restated, this time more clearly, in the cello part, signalling the approaching end of development and the return of original material. This figure, derived originally from motive (a), is emphasised throughout the development section. Its derivation is clarified in bar 79 by the cello, and the following melodic development by violin 1 resembles (b)2, but is based almost exclusively on the interval of a fourth. At bar 112, (a) and (a)1 return, both transposed up a perfect fourth; (b) and (b)1 follow, transposed up a perfect fourth and fifth respectively, creating a less dissonant effect than the original statement (see Figure 23). There follows an abbreviated statement of (c) transposed up a perfect fifth, an adjustment to the lower parts again giving a sense of relative consonance. The movement ends with the strongly rhythmical (c)3 and a reiterated C major triad. The second movement provides respite from the complex motivic workings of the first. There are only two significant themes, the second of which is simply a series of falling fifths (see Figure 24). This movement is dominated by falling motives, in contrast with the upward slant of much first movement material; the themes are less chromatic, textures are less dense and the tempo (adagio) more leisurely. The triplet and dotted rhythms, and a possible thematic relationship between the second theme and motive (c) of the first movement, provide continuity. As might be expected, the structure is ternary, the middle section beginning at bar 57 with a cello solo ( compare the cello recitative at the end of the development of the first movement) and ending at bar 108 with a stretto pedal point and a general pause. The third movement is a scherzo, reminiscent of Beethoven in its witty rhythmic ambiguity and folklike character. Its structure is best described as a rondo, with hints of a trio section around bar 244. Although the finale is freer in form than the first 'movement,' elerrierits of sonata structure are discernible, particularly the apparent development of material that begins at bar 104 and the etum of original material at bar 182. This is the most 'modem' of the movements, with more use of imitation, and elements of Bartok's style occasionally audible in the ostina,to passages, the modal thematic structure and ornamentation. The modal and antiphonal nature of the first subject is perhaps the clearest indication of this influence (see Figure 25). To audiences acquainted with little, if any, music of this century, Sutherland's quartet must have appeared shocking. At a time when many of her younger contemporaries were perpetuating t.lie post-rom~ntic idiom, Sutherland was developing a style which, while revealing affinities with the music of Debussy, Ravel and Bartok, is wholly her own. Contemporary composition in Australia owes much to this composer, who was among the first to come to terms with the musical language of the twentieth century." -- Deborah CrispItem Open Access Margaret Sutherland: String Quartet No. 1 (1939?) - IV. Allegro(Canberra School of Music, Australian National University, 1939) Composer: Margaret Sutherland; Davies, John"In its broad outlines, Sutherland's first tring quartet adheres closely to the classical model in spirit and structure. Like so many of her European contemporaries, Sutherland saw the well established formula as a convenient and appropriate vehicle for' absolute' music, recognising perhaps that a new-tonal idiom cast in old - forms is likely to be more readily comprehensible: certainly Debussy, Ravel and Bartok had already demonstrated the flexibility of the genre. A striking feature of this quartet, given its context, is its tonal idiom. The work was composed in Australia at a time when Australian musicians had scant acquaintance with avant-garde developments in Europe. Sutherland's extreme chromaticism and the idiom are handled with confidence and precision throughout: a remarkable feat, when the composer's limited access to scores and performances of the new music is considered. The first movement adopts the sonata structure of the classical quartet, even to the point of tonal adjustment in the recapitulation to enable satisfactory resolution of tension. The thematic material is motivic rather than melodic in nature. The three primary motives, (a), (b) and (c) all have associated countersubjects and variants. many of which are interrelated (see Figure 22). Motive (a) serves as an introduction, a call to order; its characteristic rhythm appears throughout the movement and indeed throughout the work. Its countersubject, (a)1, characterised by a descending semitone figure, will be enlarged upon in the countersubject to motive (c); (a), (b), (b)1 and (c) are clearly related in their use of an ascending major or minor third. Sutherland's use of variant motives ((b)2 and (c)3) and her fragmentation of material occasionally make it difficult for the listener to discern the identity of motives: the distinguishing feature is often the characteristic rhythm of each, for example the dotted rhythm of (a), the triplets of (b)1, the semiquavers of (c)2 and the ornamental semiquaver triplets of (c)3. Apparent from the outset is the closely woven texture, achieved by imitation and other contrapuntal techniques. In bars 1-3 we see motive (a) stated consecutively by three instruments, its countersubject (a)1 stated in part by violin 2 in bar 1, in full in bars 2-3 by violin 1 and in a variant, augmented form by the cello. This type of texture is continued throughout, resulting in a high degree of cohesion and musical logic. Motives (a) and (b) might be considered first subject material; following a brief transition of (a) and (b) combined, the second subject group, motive (c) and its variants, follows. The end of the exposition is marked by a descending fourth in the viola at bars 55-6, a figure whose significance becomes apparent later on. The development section involves the fragmentation and simultaneous statement of motivic material, beginning with (c).At bar 94 the descending fourth figure is restated, this time more clearly, in the cello part, signalling the approaching end of development and the return of original material. This figure, derived originally from motive (a), is emphasised throughout the development section. Its derivation is clarified in bar 79 by the cello, and the following melodic development by violin 1 resembles (b)2, but is based almost exclusively on the interval of a fourth. At bar 112, (a) and (a)1 return, both transposed up a perfect fourth; (b) and (b)1 follow, transposed up a perfect fourth and fifth respectively, creating a less dissonant effect than the original statement (see Figure 23). There follows an abbreviated statement of (c) transposed up a perfect fifth, an adjustment to the lower parts again giving a sense of relative consonance. The movement ends with the strongly rhythmical (c)3 and a reiterated C major triad. The second movement provides respite from the complex motivic workings of the first. There are only two significant themes, the second of which is simply a series of falling fifths (see Figure 24). This movement is dominated by falling motives, in contrast with the upward slant of much first movement material; the themes are less chromatic, textures are less dense and the tempo (adagio) more leisurely. The triplet and dotted rhythms, and a possible thematic relationship between the second theme and motive (c) of the first movement, provide continuity. As might be expected, the structure is ternary, the middle section beginning at bar 57 with a cello solo ( compare the cello recitative at the end of the development of the first movement) and ending at bar 108 with a stretto pedal point and a general pause. The third movement is a scherzo, reminiscent of Beethoven in its witty rhythmic ambiguity and folklike character. Its structure is best described as a rondo, with hints of a trio section around bar 244. Although the finale is freer in form than the first 'movement,' elerrierits of sonata structure are discernible, particularly the apparent development of material that begins at bar 104 and the etum of original material at bar 182. This is the most 'modem' of the movements, with more use of imitation, and elements of Bartok's style occasionally audible in the ostina,to passages, the modal thematic structure and ornamentation. The modal and antiphonal nature of the first subject is perhaps the clearest indication of this influence (see Figure 25). To audiences acquainted with little, if any, music of this century, Sutherland's quartet must have appeared shocking. At a time when many of her younger contemporaries were perpetuating t.lie post-rom~ntic idiom, Sutherland was developing a style which, while revealing affinities with the music of Debussy, Ravel and Bartok, is wholly her own. Contemporary composition in Australia owes much to this composer, who was among the first to come to terms with the musical language of the twentieth century." -- Deborah CrispItem Open Access Margaret Sutherland: String Quartet No. 1 (1939?) - II. Adagio(Canberra School of Music, Australian National University, 1939) Composer: Margaret Sutherland; Davies, John"In its broad outlines, Sutherland's first tring quartet adheres closely to the classical model in spirit and structure. Like so many of her European contemporaries, Sutherland saw the well established formula as a convenient and appropriate vehicle for' absolute' music, recognising perhaps that a new-tonal idiom cast in old - forms is likely to be more readily comprehensible: certainly Debussy, Ravel and Bartok had already demonstrated the flexibility of the genre. A striking feature of this quartet, given its context, is its tonal idiom. The work was composed in Australia at a time when Australian musicians had scant acquaintance with avant-garde developments in Europe. Sutherland's extreme chromaticism and the idiom are handled with confidence and precision throughout: a remarkable feat, when the composer's limited access to scores and performances of the new music is considered. The first movement adopts the sonata structure of the classical quartet, even to the point of tonal adjustment in the recapitulation to enable satisfactory resolution of tension. The thematic material is motivic rather than melodic in nature. The three primary motives, (a), (b) and (c) all have associated countersubjects and variants. many of which are interrelated (see Figure 22). Motive (a) serves as an introduction, a call to order; its characteristic rhythm appears throughout the movement and indeed throughout the work. Its countersubject, (a)1, characterised by a descending semitone figure, will be enlarged upon in the countersubject to motive (c); (a), (b), (b)1 and (c) are clearly related in their use of an ascending major or minor third. Sutherland's use of variant motives ((b)2 and (c)3) and her fragmentation of material occasionally make it difficult for the listener to discern the identity of motives: the distinguishing feature is often the characteristic rhythm of each, for example the dotted rhythm of (a), the triplets of (b)1, the semiquavers of (c)2 and the ornamental semiquaver triplets of (c)3. Apparent from the outset is the closely woven texture, achieved by imitation and other contrapuntal techniques. In bars 1-3 we see motive (a) stated consecutively by three instruments, its countersubject (a)1 stated in part by violin 2 in bar 1, in full in bars 2-3 by violin 1 and in a variant, augmented form by the cello. This type of texture is continued throughout, resulting in a high degree of cohesion and musical logic. Motives (a) and (b) might be considered first subject material; following a brief transition of (a) and (b) combined, the second subject group, motive (c) and its variants, follows. The end of the exposition is marked by a descending fourth in the viola at bars 55-6, a figure whose significance becomes apparent later on. The development section involves the fragmentation and simultaneous statement of motivic material, beginning with (c).At bar 94 the descending fourth figure is restated, this time more clearly, in the cello part, signalling the approaching end of development and the return of original material. This figure, derived originally from motive (a), is emphasised throughout the development section. Its derivation is clarified in bar 79 by the cello, and the following melodic development by violin 1 resembles (b)2, but is based almost exclusively on the interval of a fourth. At bar 112, (a) and (a)1 return, both transposed up a perfect fourth; (b) and (b)1 follow, transposed up a perfect fourth and fifth respectively, creating a less dissonant effect than the original statement (see Figure 23). There follows an abbreviated statement of (c) transposed up a perfect fifth, an adjustment to the lower parts again giving a sense of relative consonance. The movement ends with the strongly rhythmical (c)3 and a reiterated C major triad. The second movement provides respite from the complex motivic workings of the first. There are only two significant themes, the second of which is simply a series of falling fifths (see Figure 24). This movement is dominated by falling motives, in contrast with the upward slant of much first movement material; the themes are less chromatic, textures are less dense and the tempo (adagio) more leisurely. The triplet and dotted rhythms, and a possible thematic relationship between the second theme and motive (c) of the first movement, provide continuity. As might be expected, the structure is ternary, the middle section beginning at bar 57 with a cello solo ( compare the cello recitative at the end of the development of the first movement) and ending at bar 108 with a stretto pedal point and a general pause. The third movement is a scherzo, reminiscent of Beethoven in its witty rhythmic ambiguity and folklike character. Its structure is best described as a rondo, with hints of a trio section around bar 244. Although the finale is freer in form than the first 'movement,' elerrierits of sonata structure are discernible, particularly the apparent development of material that begins at bar 104 and the etum of original material at bar 182. This is the most 'modem' of the movements, with more use of imitation, and elements of Bartok's style occasionally audible in the ostina,to passages, the modal thematic structure and ornamentation. The modal and antiphonal nature of the first subject is perhaps the clearest indication of this influence (see Figure 25). To audiences acquainted with little, if any, music of this century, Sutherland's quartet must have appeared shocking. At a time when many of her younger contemporaries were perpetuating t.lie post-rom~ntic idiom, Sutherland was developing a style which, while revealing affinities with the music of Debussy, Ravel and Bartok, is wholly her own. Contemporary composition in Australia owes much to this composer, who was among the first to come to terms with the musical language of the twentieth century." -- Deborah Crisp