Examination of Ulvi Cemal Erkin’s Piano Concerto with GTTM

Abstract

In the first half of the 20th-century, our composers, who mix the usûl, scale and variety structures of Turkish makam music sound materials with Western music sound system and harmony techniques, form, resorted to scale-based approaches. It is consider that Erkin was composed Piano Concerto in these approachs. However, in the common practice of the sonata allegro or the rondo form in the classical period, there is a systematic plan in the harmonic progression. The aim of this study is to examine Ulvi Cemal Erkin’s style of harmony through the example of the Piano Concerto. In this context, it will be tried to determine the harmonic path, the tension-relaxtion regions and points in the melodic and the harmonic progression that the composer constructed in this work. Our main concern will be the tonal/modal construct that Erkin establishes while handling these forms. Our sub-problem is to investigate whether there is a systematic relationship between sections in Erkin’s Piano Concerto in the context of tonal/modal constructs. Specifically, we will examine whether Erkin adhered to the harmonic progressions commonly used in the Classical period while handling the sonata allegro and rondo forms. If not, we will try to find the tonal/modal setups he employed. In this study, answers will be sought to the questions of what are the qualities of the scales as the sound material used. This study was employed a literature review and musical analysis method. A Generative Theory of Tonal Music (GTTM) was used as a musical analysis method. The literature review was carried out in theses, articles, reviews, and biographical publications on Erkin’s works and The Piano Concerto, as well as papers, articles, and theses on GTTM. As a result of the study, harmonic progression that we defined in global regions in the Erkin’s Piano Concerto coincide with strong prolongation and weak prolongation patterns, except for two regions and repetitions of regions. In this direction, we consider that while composing this work, Erkin adhered to the tonal harmonic progression, and composing the first part of the work in the form of sonata allegro form and the fourth part in the rondo-chain form. However, a specific harmonic construct was designed in both sections. In this dissertation, it has been observed that Erkin used tetratonic, pentatonic and heptatonic scales, which are sound materials used in Turkish makam music and Western music in the 20th century. In our dissertation, four rule proposals and one rule revision were made for GTTM in the context of the Erkin’s Piano Concerto.

Keywords

• music theory
• piano concerto
• GTTM
• music analysis
• Generative Theory

References

1. Altınsoy, A. (2017). Ulvi Cemal Erkin keman konçertosunun müzikal analizi (Musical analysis of Ulvi Cemal Erkin violin concerto). Master thesis. Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir.
2. Baysal, O. (2011). Phrase rhythm and time in Beste-i Kadims: A cyclical approach. Doctoral dissertation. Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul.
3. Belce, M. S. (2018). Ulvi Cemal Erkin’in “Köçekçe” isimli orkestra için Dans Rapsodisi’nin müzikal analizi ve orkestra şefliği teknikleri açısından incelenmesi (The musical analysis and the examination on the maestro techniques of 'Köçekçe' dance rhapsody composed by Ulvi Cemal Erkin for the orchestra). Master thesis. Hacettepe University, Ankara.
4. Bigand, E. (1990). Abstraction of two forms of underlying structure in a tonal melody. Psychology of Music, 18(1), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735690181004
5. Brewer, L. (2014). Cognitive connections between linguistic and musical syntax an optimality theoretic approach. Master thesis. Graduate Faculty of Georgia University of Georgia, Athens.
6. Burkholder, J. P., Grout, D. J., & Palisca, C. V. (2010). A history of western music. New York, London: W.W.Norton & Company.
7. Çalgan, K. (1992). 1991 Onur ödülü altın madalya sahibi Ulvi Cemal Erkin’e armağan (Present to Ulvi Cemal Erkin who was given the award honour and gold medal). Ankara: Publications of Sevda-Cenap And Music Foundation.
8. Çınar, O. (2015). Ulvi Cemal Erkin’in müzik dili, geleneksel Türk müziği ile ilişkisi ve orkestra için “Senfonik Bölüm” eserinin analizi (Musical language of Ulvi Cemal Erkin, his relation with traditional Turkish music and analysis of symphonic movement for orchestra). Proficiency in Art, İstanbul University, İstanbul.

9. Clarke, D. (2017). North Indian classical music and Lerdahl and Jackendoff s Generative Theory - A mutual regard. Music Theory Online, 23(3), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.30535/mto.23.3.3
10. Çöloğlu, E. (2005). Çağdaş Türk bestecilerinin 20. yy. müziğinin modernist anlayışlarıyla etkileşimi (The interaction of contemporary Turkish composers with the modernist perceptions of the 20th century music). Master Thesis. Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University, İstanbul.
11. Deliège, I. (1987). Grouping conditions in listening to music : an approach to Lerdahl & Jackendoff ’ s grouping preference rules. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 4(4), 325–359. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40285378
12. Dibben, N. (1994). The cognitive reality of hierarchic structure in tonal and atonal music. Music Perception, 12(1), 1–25. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40285753?seq=1
13. Ezgi, S. (1933a). Nazari ve ameli Türk musikisi (Theoretical and applied Turkish music) Vol I. İstanbul: Milli Mecmua Press.
14. Ezgi, S. (1933b). Nazari ve Ameli Türk Musikisi (Theoretical and applied Turkish music), Vol IV. İstanbul: Milli Mecmua Press.
15. Frankland, B. W. (1998). Empirical test of Lerdahl and Jackendoff’s (1983) low-level group prefence rules for parsing of melody. Doctoral dissertation. Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia.
16. Frankland, B. W., & Cohen, A. J. (2004). Parsing of melody: Quantification and testing of the local grouping rules of Lerdahl and Jackendoff’s a generative theory of tonal music. Music Perception, 21(4), 499–543. https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2004.21.4.499
17. Gauldin, R. (2004). Harmonic Practice in Tonal Music (2.). W.W.Norton & Company, New York, London.
18. Güldoğan, A. (1999). Ulvi Cemal Erkin’in piyano eserleri aracılığıyla, geleneksel müziklerimizden, çağdaş Türk müzik sanatına taşıdığı müzikal unsurların incelenmesi (To examine the influence of traditional Turkish music on contemporary compositions specifically as axemplified in pianopieces composed by Ulvi Cemal Erkin). Master thesis. Uludağ University, Bursa.
19. Hansen, N. C. (2011). The legacy of Lerdahl and Jackendoff’s “a generative theory of tonal music”: Bridging a significant event in the history of music theory and recent developments in cognitive music research. Danish Yearbook of Musicology, 38, 34–55.
20. Harvey, D. (1985). Review: A generative theory of tonal music by Fred Lerdahl, Ray Jackendoff. Journal of Music Theory, 28(2), 271–294. https://doi.org/10.2307/843535
21. Hepokoski, J., & Darcy, W. (2006). Elements of sonata theory: Norms, types, and deformations in the late-eighteenth-century sonata. Oxford University Press.
22. Hirata, K., Tojo, S., & Hamanaka, M. (2014). Cognitive similarity grounded by tree distance from the analysis of K.265/300e. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 8905, 589–605. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12976-1_36
23. Hjortkjær, J. (2009). Hierarchical perception of melody. Proceedings of the 7th Triennial Conference of European Society for the Cognitive Sciences of Music (ESCOM 2009) Jyväskylä, Finland Jukka Louhivuori, Tuomas Eerola,
24. Suvi Saarikallio, Tommi Himberg, Päivi-Sisko Eerola (Editors), 181–186. https://jyx.jyu.fi/bitstream/handle/123456789/20874/urn_nbn_fi_jyu-2009411258.pdf?sequence=1
25. Jackendoff, R., & Lerdahl, F. (1980). Discovery procedures vs. rules of musical grammar in a generative music theory. Perspectives of New Music, 18(1/2), 503–510. https://doi.org/10.2307/833000
26. Kalın, I. (2019). Ulvi Cemal Erkin piyano sonatının biçimsel yapısı ve çalış teknikleri açısından incelenmesi (Formal structure of Ulvi Cemal Erkin's piano sonata and its examination in terms of playing techniques). Master Thesis. Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir.
27. Karadeniz, İ. (2019). Belirsiz bir Türk müziği esintisi: Erkin, piyano konçertosu, II. Andante. (An ambiguity Turkish music air: Erkin, piano concerto, II. Andante) Sanat Yazıları, 40(May), 159–181.
28. Karadeniz, İ. (2020). Saygun müziğinde makam soyutlamaları: Piyano konçertosu Op. 34, I (Makam abstractions on Saygun's music: Piano Concerto, op. 34, I). Doctoral dissertation. Hacettepe University, Ankara.
29. Knauss, D. E. (2011). “Note”able endings: An investigation of expected answer to melodic question. Master Thesis. The Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania.
30. Kutluğ, Y. F. (2000). Türk mûsikisinde makamlar (Makams in Turkish Music). İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Press.
31. Lerdahl, F. (1987). Timbral hierarchies. Contemporary Music Review, 2(1), 135–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/07494468708567056
32. Lerdahl, F. (1989). Atonal prolongational structure. Contemporary Music Review, 4(1), 65–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/07494468900640211
33. Lerdahl, F. (1992). Cognitive constraints on compositional systems. Contemporary Music Review, 6(2), 97–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/07494469200640161
34. Lerdahl, F. (2001). Tonal pitch space. Oxford University Press.
35. Lerdahl, F. (2013). Musical syntax and ıts relation to linguistic syntax. Language, Music, and the Brain, May, 257– 272. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262018104.003.0010
36. Lerdahl, F. (2015). Concepts and representations of musical hierarchies. Music Perception, 33(1), 83–95. https://doi.org/10.1525/MP.2015.33.1.83
37. Lerdahl, F., & Halle, J. (2017). A generative textsetting model. Current Musicology, 55, 3–23.
38. Lerdahl, F., & Jackendoff, R. (1977). Toward a formal theory of tonal music. Journal of Music Theory, 21(1), 111–171. https://doi.org/10.2307/843480
39. Lerdahl, F., & Jackendoff, R. (1981a). Generative music theory and ıts relation to psychology. Journal of Music Theory, 25(1), 45–90.
40. Lerdahl, F., & Jackendoff, R. (1981b). On the theory of grouping and meter. Musical Quarterly, 67(4), 479–506. https://doi.org/10.1093/mq/LXVII.4.479
41. Lerdahl, F., & Jackendoff, R. (1982). A grammatical parallel between music and language. In Music, Mind, and Brain: The Neuropsychology of Music (pp. 83–117).
42. Lerdahl, F., & Jackendoff, R. (1983a). A generative theory of tonal music. Cambridge, Massachusetts, ABD: MIT Yayınları.
43. Lerdahl, F., & Jackendoff, R. (1983b). An overview of hierarchical structure in music. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 1(2), 229–252. https://doi.org/10.2307/40285257
44. Nemutlu, M., & Manav, Ö. (2011). Müzikte Alımlama (Reception in music). İstanbul: Pan Publishing.
45. Ordoñana, J. A., & Laucirica, A. (2010). Lerdahl and Jackendoff’s grouping structure rules in the performance of a Hindemith sonata. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 13(1), 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1017/S113874160000370X
46. Sayın, S. (2018). Ulvi Cemal Erkin’in piyano için “Altı Prelüd” adlı eserinin teknik ve müzikal açıdan incelenmesi (Technical and musical analysis of the piano piece called Six Preludes by Ulvi Cemal Erkin). Proficiency in Art. Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University, İstanbul.
47. Tsougras, C. (2002). Generative theory of tonal music and modality: Research based on the analysis of “44 Greek miniatures for piano” by Yannis Constantinidis (Yunanca). Doctoral dissertation. Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki.
48. Tsougras, C. (2010). The application of GTTM on 20th century modal music: Research based on the analysis of Yannis Constantinidis’s “44 Greek miniatures for piano.” Musicae Scientiae, 14, 157–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/10298649100140S108