One day in mid 2024 while considering what was possibly my most original work, I settled on "Three Chance Pieces Plus One" for piano (No. 47). I thought, if I were to extend the ideas of this work, it would be most interesting to use them for a string quartet. I decided to do this using the same "cells" and form which I had used for the piano piece, that is, a four movement piece: 1. fast, 2. slow, 3. fast, 4. mixed tempi, where the last movement is a synthesis of the three first movements.

First Movement

At first I planned to use the same rhythmic and register patterns I had used for the piano pieces but since I was now able to use a computer instead of a die I could have chance operations with different probabilities (as 1-6). My adaptation of the earlier plan now looked like this:

Register refers to the pitch regions (high, middle, low) of the instruments in pairs: 2 Violins (top) as one pair and Viola and Cello (bottom) as the other. There are 8 register diagrams showing lines in regions high or low or of lines depicting movement from one region to another. The 8 Register diagrams have equal probabilities.

Then there are 8 rhythmic shapes and since 2+3, 4+5, and 6+7 are all equal pairs the three different shapes have a probability of a quarter while 1 and 8 each have a probability of one eighth. However after an early trial I decided to delete rhythmic shape number one and double number eight, so in the end number eight also had a probability of one quarter. The colour scheme corresponding to the Rhythmic shapes is explained below the next diagram.

At this stage I wrote to Rod Harries about the project and he agreed to design me a computer program which would produce a diagram of the complete movement. The text of this program will be published here at a later date.

I wanted the piece to be made of 50 bars of irregular lengths. These would be shown on the diagram as "boxes" and would have durations in seconds using numbers from the Fibonacci series: 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13. These "boxes" would occur with different probabilities: durations 1 and 13 would each have probabilities of 0.1 and the durations (2, 3, 5, 8,) of 0.2 each. My wish was to have as much information as possible on this diagram. Rod set aside the left of each "box" for four numbers, plus two numbers in the middle, another above and two beneath. Taking "box" 16 as an example I have labeled these "box"-numbers a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i (in red) and described them below. At the top and bottom of the "boxes" are groups of 2 or 3 "coloured blobs", (marked with red square brackets). These are to show how the quavers in this "box" are to be grouped in 2s and 3s.

The colours of these "blobs" are used to show the Rhythmic patterns. Since there are now just 4 different Rhythmic patterns only 4 colours are needed and it is unimportant whether the blobs are "filled or empty".

Black: 8. Red: 2 or 3. Green: 4 or 5. Blue: 6 or 7.

Another important principle is that of a surprise. Since so much of the sound material is quaver movement, the need for a surprise is great. To this end there are two sorts of "contrasting boxes": one marked orange where the quavers are replaced by tremolandi and the other green where we hear loud glissandi.

I let the program run several times and then chose the following diagram to realise in musical notation:

The next job was to transfer all this information onto the score. This "working score" contained 4 extra staves, two for the Pitch Cells (top and bottom pairs of instruments) and two more for Register (also top and bottom pairs) and Rhythmic shapes:

Although so much was determined by the chance system of the computer program there was still much that I could decide myself. The most obvious parameter which has not yet been mentioned is loudness (dynamics). I also allowed myself to include extra rests and occasionally longer notes. Tempo and tempo changes were determined later as was timbre (arco/pizz.).

Second Movement

The basis of this movement is a series of 20 ostinati, selected at random from the Pitch Cell-Table (see first diagram above). In a first version of this movement the viola played the ostinati throughout. Later I changed this — see André Fischer's criticism of this below.

Against this as background the other instruments, which are not playing the ostinato, play two sets of material described in the score as Hauptthema (main theme) and Nebenthema (subordinate theme) built on a separate selection of the Pitch Cells.

Here Rod Harries wrote a new program to produce a diagram (now called a Map) of the movement:

The ostinati have different numbers of notes depending on which Pitch Cell is chosen. The length of each bar is the number of notes in the chosen cell measured in quavers. The computer program chooses a Pitch Cell, reads how many notes the cell contains and draws a bar with a "Stepped Line", the number of steps being that of the number of notes in the cell. It then selects a new random number between 2 and 8 for the number of repetitions of the ostinato and draws a corresponding number of bars on the Map. For the element of surprise it interpolates an extra bar (with a probability of one tenth) which is labelled "Hold". This is so named because the last note of the last ostinato is held over into the extra bar. The last two bars of the movement are also "Hold"-bars.

The "Stepped Line" is drawn in 4 different colours: red, green, blue, brown. The colours indicate the rhythmic shape of the Hauptthema:

• Red, (with a probability of one third) — no Hauptthema (HT)
• Green, (with a probability of one half) — ascending or descending HT
• Blue, (with a probability of one sixth) — chord as HT
• Brown, just for "Hold" bars

When I showed André Fischer a "work in progress"-version of the first three movements, his comment to M2 was: "Warum belässt du das Achtel-Motiv ausschliesslich in der Viola?" ("Why do you give the quaver-motive exclusively to the Viola?") — and further: "It would enliven the movement if the roles were not fixed." This seemed a very reasonable criticism and so (in keeping with the philosophy of the whole work) I made a short program which printed out which instrument should play the ostinato and when the change should take place.

Bar4 Vla, Bar8 Vla, Bar11 Cello, Bar14 Vla, Bar17 Vn1, Bar19 Vla,Bar24 Vn1, Bar26 Vn1, Bar28 Vla, Bar31 Vn1, Bar34 Vn2, Bar38 Vn2,Bar40 Vn2, Bar45 Vla, Bar49 Vla, Bar52 Vn1, Bar57 Vla, Bar59 Cello, Bar61 Vn2, Bar64 Vla, Bar68 Vla, Bar72 Vn1, Bar74 Cello, Bar76 Vn2, Bar80 Vla, Bar82 Vla, Bar87 Vn2.

And of course André was right. It gave the movement a new feeling of unpredictability, and because of the resulting conflict of functions I was sometimes forced to make the change in the middle of an ostinato which adds to the surprise. These ostinato-changes are all shown in the score, for example: before figure 3, where the viola is playing the ostinato, one reads in the viola part: "to Cello",and after figure 3 in the cello part is written: "from Viola". My wish is that the players involved will make a gesture of "handing over" and of "receiving" so that the audience will notice the change.

Third Movement

The third movement is an A B A’ form. The second A has a dash to indicate that it is shorter than the first. Since the form was determined in advance there was no need for a program to produce a diagram (or "map") of the movement.

Both the A and the B sections contain five patterns or Types:

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 and B1 B2 B3 B4 B5

The first three A and B Types are variants of the same basic patterns, the others are contrasting ideas. These are best shown graphically:

I have seldom had such difficulty to realise ideas for a piece. First attempts to test the sounds of A1, A2 + A3 showed that this lacked complexity so I added the “Long Note” (see ‘+‘ on the diagram above). More difficult were the corresponding B-sections which went through at least 10 different test phases.

In order to know more clearly what programs I would need, I made a trial version of M3. I discovered that my original plan of A (20 sections), B (20 sections), A’ (10 sections) was rather too long. The final best solution was made with the program Quart3V5.bas where the lengths are reduced to A (16), B (16), A’ (8) from which I chose one print-out.

The data are headed with:

Box Type C1 C2 Rpt Reg P LN which mean:

Box: is what I have called sections above. These are marked in the working score with “Rehearsal Numbers” 1 to 40

Type: is the pattern number, ie. A1, A2, A3, A4, A5,B1, B2, B3, B4, B5.

C1 C2: are the cell numbers. These are used in the A sections for the chords, C1 for the violins and C2 for viola and cello

Rpt: Originally meant “repetitions” but here it gives the length of each bar: 3, 5, 8 or 13 beats long.

Reg: Register. H (high) M (middle) L (low) — of the various instruments,

P: Pitch. This was originally planned for the pitch of the main note in the B-sections, but then was also used for the “Long Note” in the A-sections.

LN: “Long Note” — see above. Since not all A-sections were to contain a “Long Note” the symbols + and – were used to mean: + = with LN and – = without LN

An important additional program, M3.bas was used for the accents in the A-sections 1, 2 + 3. This used an accumulation of Fibonacci numbers, 2, 3, 5, and 8

NB: the first beat is always accented:

Finally the contrasting material of A5 and B4 and B5 was kindly supplied by a program from Rod in the form of a Basic File which generates a Musicxml file: QuintP3.bas. The program uses all notes of the chromatic scale (with equal probabilities) and durations of 1,2, 3, or 5 beats. At first I didn’t realise that I had to add the suffix “.xml” to the file generated by the basic file. Rod answered my question on a Monday thus:

“When QuintP runs it puts up a dialog box to open an output file. The xml is written to this file as well as, mixed with other stuff, to the screen. That output file needs to be given a .musicxml extension. The easiest way to do that is to change the name “temp” which appears in the dialog box to, for example, Monday.musicxml otherwise you have to rename the file afterwards. That renamed file should be acceptable to Sibelius etc.”

So all the melodies made with this program are called Monday 1 – 10!! If one looks at rehearsal number 2 (below) one can see “Monday 1”as it was written by the program and above in the string parts, the liberties I took with transposition. For the B sections I took even greater liberties: see rehearsal no. 20 where Monday 3 is used and nos. 28 and 29 for Monday 8 and 5.

Fourth Movement

If M3 was difficult then M4 was severely difficult. It should have been quite straight forward, since I knew from the beginning that, based on “Plus One” of the “Three Chance Pieces for Piano”, it would use the same material for the first three movements, and this would sound new since chance was operating and would produce versions of that material which we had not yet heard. I therefore asked Rod for a “Map” of M4 with 60 “boxes”.

6. 04. 25, Email from Kit to Rod:

As I mentioned at the beginning this will be made of material from the first three Ms. It should have about 60 “bars” and the music of the first 20 “bars” will come mainly from the programs used for creating M1 and in “bars” 21 to 40 mainly from those used for M2 and similarly for 41 to 60 from those used for M3. “Mainly” means this:

Bars 1 to 20 will be: M1 60% M2 20% M3 20%

Bars 21 to 40 will be: M1 20% M2 60% M3 20%

Bars 41 to 60 will be: M1 20% M2 20% M3 60%

Also, sprinkled in at unsuspecting moments (called interpolations) will be a chord, heard once, twice or thrice. There will be about 3 to 5 interpolations. Now I have had a new thought:

M4 could have a Coda which would be a fugue using themes which we have already heard.

12. 04. 25, Email from Rod:

I have read the Notes on M3 and found them entertaining. ‘Is comprised of’ is still present to jarr my sensibilities. ‘Comprises’ is what is needed, though, strictly speaking, ‘comprises’ should be followed by an exhaustive list, otherwise ‘contains’.

I have also listened (twice) to the m3.mp3. My irreformably Baroque mind kept waiting for a tune or thema to appear, but once I had persuaded it to go to sleep for a bit, I enjoyed it.

13. 04. 25, Email from Kit:

Many thanks for your comments on M3, both to the words and to the music. I have changed “is comprised of" to “contains”. Strange that you were waiting for a theme or a melody — I thought there was one, where all instruments play a “Monday” theme unisono or in octaves. I have had a new thought for M4, partly inspired by Nelson Wattie to whom I showed M1. He said he thought he had heard a quote from Beethoven’s “Grosse Fuge”. No idea why he thought that, but it set me thinking that I could perhaps repeat material from M1, M2 + M3 in the form of a fugue, and perhaps even quote Beethoven or “Die Kunst der Fuge” or both. I’ve been working on a fragment of a fugue, called "Unfug M4", to have an idea of what I would need from a computer program. Still not sure what such a pogrom would look like, but I should be able to tell you very soon.

The process of drawing a map for M4 went through several preliminary stages. Here is one of the early versions (29. 04. 25)

02. 05. 25, Email from Rod:

On MayDay I got most of the subroutine which makes m2 boxes done, and finished(?) it this morning, but, if you run it you will notice that it has a slight bug. I will fix(?) this shortly(?). You will also notice that I discovered how to retain enough of the glorious technicolour to be useful.

02. 05. 25, Email from Kit:

That’s getting very close now to a usable map — congratulations and many thanks! And it’s good with the colour bands. A tiny worry struck me: It could be that the M2 material is rather too much, since it is played at about half the tempo of the M1 and M3 stuff. There might be two ways of correcting this: 1) Reducing the size of M2 or 2) Removing the bar length 13 for M2. But I’ll wait until the M3s are there before asking for a change. One other thing though: the space for the whole map is often bigger than my screen. It’s a pity that one can’t write text (and numbers) smaller in Chipmunk. I can’t see how you can save much space anywhere?

03. 05. 25, Email from Rod:

I have made two small changes:

(1) since I do not know how to calculate the actual duration of m3 boxes I have set them all to zero;

(2) I have shaved a few pixels off various things to help with screen overflow problems.

There is a parameter ‘rebound’, the third entry in the Page and Box Layout Dimensions. It determines the maximum width that rows will go to. If you increase it the diagram will become wider but shorter, and v.v. This is why I moaned earlier on about lack of scroll bars in the graphics window. If it had them it wouldn’t matter how big the diagram became and providing them would have been very simple for the composer of Chipmunk. All the hard work is done by the Apple graphics system. But it’s too late now.

07. 05. 25, Email from Kit:

Busy day yesterday with Brigittchen’s b-day: lotza telephones and visitors and an expotition to the Zürcher Kunsthaus. Hardly had a moment to look at Quart4V8. Now I have and think there is still too much red (M2) in it. Therefore I am asking if you could kindly make this adjustment:

Bars 1 to 25 will be: M1 70% M2 10% M3 20%

Bars 26 to 35 will be: M1 33% M2 33% M3 33%

Bars 36 to 60 will be: M1 20% M2 10% M3 70%

This should ensure that the predominant tempi are the two faster ones — but feel free to put in other numbers if you wish.

08. 05. 25 Email from Rod: habemus papam

Pope Leo XIV and a bloody American but also a Mathematician.

09. 05. 25, Email from Rod:

I realised the other day that all the drawing that Chipmunk does in its graphics window is perfectly easy to do in Swift, viz ‘color’, ‘moveto’, ‘lineto’, ‘rect’, fillrect’, ‘oval’, ‘filloval’, and a lot of others which Chipmunk can’t do. I also suspect that my problems earlier stemmed from not being careful enough when starting the project to choose correctly amongst the baffling array of options offered in the set-up screens. I might cautiously investigate this. The great advantage would be that I could draw into a view with scrollbars, so overflowing the physical screen wouldn’t happen. It ought to be possible to print the view contents, but I have no idea how one does that.

The results of this “cautious investigation” were that it was safer to stay as we were with Chipmonk Basic. If the green boxes were drawn to scale the screen would overflow and besides, the durations of those boxes were clearly shown by numbers which were easy for me to use.

22. 05. 25, Email from Kit:

Nearly a week has elapsed since I started on M4 and am half way through. The fact that the green bits (M3s) don’t show the correct length is in fact no problem at all.

Then on 2. 6. 25 came this horrifying message from Rod:

I think I’m having a stroke Have summoned aid Rod

At first stunned — how does one help a friend having a stroke on the other side of this globe? Then I rang Philip Woollaston who lives in Upper Moutere not far from Rod in Motueka. He tried ringing Rod’s sister Gwyneth, but she and her husband were in Australia on holiday. However the Nelson Public Hospital could confirm that he was there. Rod was indeed partly paralysed but it was good that he had reacted so quickly, the chances for a recovery were good.

Over the next few weeks I bombarded him with short emails and made it clear that we didn’t expect answers. Already, though, on the 9th of June he wrote a longish “reply” which shows how well his brain was still working:

09. 06. 25, Email from Rod:

I came across a clue & solution in a cryptic crossword in the New Scientist which made me laugh. The clue is: musical dances seen in Persian upbringing, perhaps. 9 letters. I tried all sorts of tricks with “ballet” to see if it helped, but no. Eventually from filling in other things I decided that the last five letters were “balls”. At first I thought that accounted for “musical dances”, but eventually concluded that it was only “dances”, and that “musical” implied a singing stage performance, four letters, so ‘hair’. So we have “hairballs” for “musical dances”. “Persian” as in Persian cat. Upbringing as in throwing up. And of course hairballs are often found in cat vomit. What ingenuity went into constructing that clue!

10. 06. 25, Email from Kit:

Here is a “progress” report to M4. I have finished the 60 boxes of your M4-map and have decided that it needs a Coda! — and that the Coda needs a Codetta!! The Coda I wrote some time ago. It is a Fugue, since I wanted to quote Beethoven’s "Grosse Fuge”. Now for the Codetta I have made a tiny ChipMunk for just 8 boxes:

I even notated it à la Harries.

… and the version I chose is this:

Bar 89A3 LC1 = 69 C2 = 37 R = 5 B1 = 8 -

Bar 91A3 HC1 = 47 C2 = 52 R = 8 B1 = 4 -

Bar 93A2 LC1 = 62 C2 = 31 R = 13 B1 = 3 -

Bar 95A1 MC1 = 60 C2 = 69 R = 5 B1 = 6 -

Bar 97A3 HC1 = 47 C2 = 17 R = 13 B1 = 7 +

Bar 99A1 HC1 = 14 C2 = 11 R = 13 B1 = 7 -

Bar 101A3 HC1 = 28 C2 = 62 R = 13 B1 = 1 +

Bar 103A3 MC1 = 32 C2 = 41 R = 13 Final Bar

And if you want to know what the Beethoven theme is, it is in the link above as the first of “Other motifs” both as notation and as sounds.

As soon as I have finished the Codetta I shall try and turn the whole thing into sounds and if they are not too doridiculous you will hear them. I suspect this might take some time, hopefully (for you) more time than you will be in hospital.

14. 06. 25, Email from Kit:

I have been listening to the first “complete” version of M4 (plus coda and codetta) and am coming sadly (after lots of work) to the opinion that it is too long.

I therefore asked Rod what I should change in the program for the “map” of M4 to reduce the 20 sections to 16.

14. 06. 25, Email from Kit:

In Quart4V10 you wrote: ‘Each section is divided into 20 sub-sections which are called herein ‘boxes’ {box}

Perhaps 16 sub-sectionsmight be better. I might try (with a heavy heart) to find where that 20 is mentioned and see if I can change it.

Both the Coda and the Codetta contain quotes from Beethoven’s “Grosse Fuge” which work well I think. This gives rise to a new question: Should a theme or themes from that work also appear earlier? No one has answered that yet.

15. 06. 25, Email from Rod:

I’ll make this short because G&B are coming. I think there is an outer for-loop going 1 to 3 or 0 to 2 Inside that there is probably a ‘select case …’ Each ‘case’ inside the select probably calls a subroutine So you need to find those subroutines They will each have a for-loop probably going 1 to 20 On reflection I am pretty sure the outer loop is 0 to 2 Anyhow you need to change the upper limit of those three inner loops I imagine Philip could find them easily.

15. 06. 25, Email from Kit:

Merci for those lines about M4. You are right, Philip found the place to change quite quickly. I had spent a half hour studying the text and looking for the number 20 without success. I had completely forgotten that you had (at my request) reduced the size of the 2nd section and so the number 20 was no longer present.

All I had to do was to change

144 case 0 : exb = 1 : adb = 25

146 case 1 : exb = 26 : adb = 35

148 case 2 : exb = 36 : adb = 60

to

144 case 0 : exb = 1 : adb = 20

146 case 1 : exb = 21 : adb = 28

148 case 2 : exb = 29 : adb = 48

and it worked perfectly!

19. 06. 25, Email from Rod entitled Covid

I’m positive though feeling ok. More later. Rod

20. 06. 25, Email from Rod:

Still feeling ok. I’m still in bed 8B but the original roommate has been brought back and the more recent one moved to safety – if there is any such thing now, because I think there are a lot of covid cases. I’ll keep you posted. Love, Rod

27. 06. 25: Email from Kit:

I had shown M1 M2 and M3 to André Fischer my Music Theory, conductor and composer friend. He was quite positive about most of it, but thought it strange that the Viola played the ostinati in M2 throughout — why not divide the ostinato-part up among all 4 instruments? he asked. (see details above in Movement 2)

I also asked some specific questions:

1. What do you think of the three movements in general? 

— great, I’m curious about the Finale that will follow.

2. What look like “rehearsal" numbers are in fact “construction” numbers. Should there be fewer of these for a performing score?

— No, they’re fine and do not disturb my reading.

3. First Movement: I’m worried that the grouping of twos and threes at the fast speed might be terribly difficult to play. What do you think? 

— No worry about that!

4. Second Movement:

— OK I think see my comments above.

5. Third Movement: The bars with 8 or 13 beats are also “construction” numbers. These would be better divided e.g: 8 = 4+4 and 13 = 3+3+3+4 for a performing score? 

— Yes, the Perform - Full Score is much better to read.

6. Third Movement: Are all the down-bows possible at that fast speed? 

— I would think so. Much more difficult in general are Pizzicato-passages at fast speed.

07. 07. 25 Email from Rod:

Home. Toileted. Lunched. Warm. Quiet Free from shouting and crashing and being interrogated

about how I’m going to do that at home. Waiting for Alis to decide the coast is clear Rod

24. 07. 25, Letter from Kit to André Fischer:

… Originally the idea was (as in the “Plus One” of the “Three Chance Pieces" for piano) to make the last movement with material from the first three movements — see the diagram below where blue is M1, red is M2 and green is M3. Suddenly it seemed that such an expectation could never be met with the same old stuff again! Then I remembered the comment of my old friend Nelson Wattie in Wellington to whom I had sent the same simulations which you heard. He asked: “Is there a quote from Beethoven’s Grosse Fuge" in the first movement? Of course there wasn’t, but it set me thinking!

Now come the following big questions to you, dear André: Does this M4 with its Beethoven allusions fulfil your expectations? Or does it leave you wondering "why Beethoven?” and "why only in M4? Why not earlier too?" I am hoping for comforting answers since it sounds good to me now.

My only answer to “why Beethoven?” is that I admire the “Grosse Fuge" greatly and it stands for me as one of the most important works in the whole string quartet literature.

You may wonder why I have called this the shortened version. Originally I had a plan with 60 boxes. I completed this, but then found it much too long. I made a new plan with 48 boxes and completed this too, this time with the Beethoven quotes as well. I found this also too long, but felt that the Beethoven parts were good. So what I am sending you is the third version of M4 — (all this reminds me of Beethoven’s struggle with his Leonore Overtures!):

NB.: Before box1 of the diagram below is a seven bar Introduction (a distorted version of the opening of the “Grosse Fuge”) and after the last box (38 — new numbers) is an extended Coda (numbers 39 to 44), a fugue combining my material with Beethoven’s.

Black crosses in the boxes below show what has been crossed out from the “48 box” plan.

And André’s reply:

I listened to the first three movements again in context and then to the new fourth. My first impression (and it's always important) can be summarized as follows:

I hear material from movement 3 too early (already starting with figure 2), too much, and too often (the same old stuff, in fact).

The single quotation from movement 2 (figure 13) seems incoherent, lost, and not understandable to me at this point.

movement 4 is a conglomerate overall: too disparate, lacking the (unifying) feature that the other movements all have.

And here's what I like:

The beginning (connection to movement 3).

Figure 15-20 (because this passage has drive).

Figure 38 (because, due to the omission of the references, the old stuff material reveals itself from a new perspective... which then becomes unnecessarily repeated at the end of the movement).

the coda, where the (up to three) counterpunctual voices are too dense, too dominant for me (they distract me too much from the subject).

What I would try if I had the right to arrange ;-):

give the material from movement 3 a new rhythm from the beginning, so that it doesn't seem like a quotation at all, e.g., a sixteenth-note (instead of eighth-note) cadence or triplet (basic shuffle rhythm). This new rhythm could then be reversed (made Lombard-like) and combined into variations from the original and the retrograde.

gradually intersperse (prepare) the ostinato from movement 2 starting at figure 12 and present it only in fragments, e.g., shortened to a maximum of three continuous eighth notes, interrupted by rests of varying lengths. It would then no longer be a quotation, but merely a (subtle) allusion to movement 2.

Loosen up the contrapuntal voices of the coda (e.g., intersperse them with rests) so that the subject comes across better. Generally, have this subject played in unison by two instruments each (in unison, in octaves, several octaves apart, etc.).

These are a few ideas, very casual, half-baked, as a spontaneous reaction to my first impression...

... but perhaps they will inspire you for Leonore #4 ;-)?

As always, I find André’s criticisms very useful, even when I don’t agree with everything he says. What I changed was a different selection of the “boxes” so that there was more than one quote of M2 and I made a decorated version (triplets in the violin parts) of M3 which made these so much more interesting that I later went back and added similar “decorations” to M3 itself.

His criticism of the contrapuntal writing in the“Coda” also made me thin out the texture slightly but the main problem with the lack of clarity was solved with the dynamics. Here is what the final version of the “map” looks like:

André 07. 08. 25:

We're still in Eglisau, but we're leaving for Slovenia this Saturday for a good week.

Movement 4 is now really much better. I find it absolutely convincing up to figure 24. It continually builds tension, and overall, one feels like one is in a very long introduction. Then comes the clearly recognizable, good quotation from movement 2, but I would also quote tempo 70 here (at figure 24), because tempo 80 doesn't provide any contrast with basic paragraph 160. However, such a quotation would be appropriate and necessary after the long introduction.

After figure 29, I would jump directly to figure 35: Sections 30-35 offer too little new for me and are a slowing-down conglomeration, which you have otherwise eliminated. An extended unison passage, figures 29 and 35, on the other hand, would give the movement momentum.

Fugue: interesting and good!

Conclusion: I'd add a quiet, fading fermata, but I don't know why exactly...

So, that's my quick first impression.

I hope it inspires you to play Leonore 4b ;-)

Kit, 09. 08. 25 to André:

First many thanks that you found the time for Deinen "ersten Eindruck”. The most important “fact” for me is that you see everything that comes before the fugue as Introduction. Up till now I have seen the fourth movement as it looks on the “Map”:

(1) a short introduction (Beethoven),

(2) a biggish middle part (Powell) and

(3) an extended Coda (the fugue)

Seeing M4 in this new way: “A long introduction to the Fugue as main statement” made a big difference.

The Fugue was no longer merely a Coda it was the Goal of the whole movement.

I therefore added a short stretto into the fugue where the “Monday 1” theme appears with its inversion, and I added a “quiet, fading fermata” as André had suggested.

24. 08. 25, Email to Rod:

I have spent the last few days looking back at M1 with horror. I started thinking I must make sure that the tempi are the same as when it is quoted in M4 and then noticed that I had two quite different versions of M1. I shall make sure that the new one is the definitive one. I think it is already much better than the old one. I’ll show it to you when I’m quite sure.

As already mentioned, I went back to see that all these changes were consistent with what had been heard earlier. This meant changing tempi in M1 and M2 as well as adding the decorative passages to Vn 1+2 to M3.