Stace Constantinou's Étude Aux Chemins De Fer Analysis

A statistical analysis of the form of the piece Etudes aux Chemins de Fer by Pierre Schaeffer

The notion of sound as music underpins this piece. In particular the argument that sound can be experienced without any visual reference, thereby transforming the sound itself into a sonic object. Or as Pierre Schaeffer, in his book Traites Des Objets Musicaux (1966: 63), says ‘l’objet sonore’.

A continuation of this idea is that of a close or concentrated or perhaps reduced listening ‘écoute réduite’ (1966: 270).^[1] The term 'acousmatic' is thus brought into play, derived perhaps from two Greek words, akousma (to hear) and matia (to glimpse with the eye). In a straightforward way then, the idea of the term is to introduce the concept that one can see with the ear. Another possibility is a symbolic link with Pythagorean ideology/ mythology. 'Acousmatikoi' may be linked to the imagined disciples of Pythagoras (the manteio), who received the wisdom of the Great Sage from behind a screen or curtain, thus the transmission of the message remains clean from polluted visual cues.

My analysis gathers together the broad structural information to create a ‘one glimpse’ overview that can be used in conjunction with more detailed analyses, such as Michael Gatt's Typo Morphology.

I assume that Schaffer’s ideas have been successfully realised in musical terms. The purpose of this analysis is therefore to find the significant features of the macrostructure.

The decision to form a section is based on the sound object of (various types of) whistle. It was decided that each time a whistle series sounded a new section is begun. The piece begins and ends with a whistle sound and therefore there are (at least) two ways to interpret the macrostructure. The first is give the final whistle, sonic object, a section of its own (section E). The other view is to consider this final blow as a rounding off of section D (see alternative view). The latter is easier on the eye but is perhaps a reduction too far. It is very difficult to find any obvious signs of a pre-planned, architectural design to the music's structure; a 'Golden Section' or halfway or quarter point for example.

A further reduction is possible and this may help to shed more light on the structural landscape of the piece. Each section starts with a whistle sonic object and then moves into a serious of train sonic objects. There are two primary methods of development therefore, the whistle which acts as a signifier and the train sounds which act as abstractions. Therefore, Schaeffer provides a sound (in context) the whistle, followed by an abstract form of various (recognisable sounds) which challenge the listener to question and perhaps form new internal relationships between sonic objects.

Hearing the piece in this way then, it is possible to consider the form as follows: A B A B A (B) A B A B A

In this consideration therefore the macrostructure can be viewed in a new way revealing a palindromic form. The sixth B section is the central or keystone of the newly revealed architectural form. The keystone occurs at 1:37 (97 seconds) into the piece, which is just over half way through.

The alternative view is as follows: A B A B A B A B A B’

This method shows that the form is divided approximately (in time) into to equal halves 1: A B A B A 2: B A B A B’

Each half is a palindrome.

The salient feature revealed by the analysis is that there are a number of different ways (at least two) to consider the form. The main characteristic however remains unchanged, that of l’objet sonore, which is presented as the whistle signifier that announces a change of sonority, and the resulting object/s. This same signifier also signals the end of the piece; this then links the end to the beginning. Perhaps, in this way, the piece can be considered as having a circular form?