This is an author produced version of Disappearing Sounds: Fragility in the music of Jakob

Ullmann.

White Rose Research Online URL for this paper:

http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/112177/

Article:
Thurley, O orcid.org/0000-0001-8510-8800 (2015) Disappearing Sounds: Fragility in the
music of Jakob Ullmann. Tempo, 69 (274). pp. 5-21. ISSN 0040-2982

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0040298215000339

2015 Cambridge University Press. This article has been published in a revised form in
Tempo at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0040298215000339. This version is free to view and
download for private research and study only. Not for re-distribution, re-sale or use in
derivative works.

promoting access to
White Rose research papers
[email protected]
http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/
DISAPPEARING SOUNDS:
FRAGILITY IN THE MUSIC OF JAKOB ULLMANN 1
O LIVER THURLEY

This article is published in TEMPO, Volume 69, Issue 274, October 2015, pp 521.
It can be found here, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0040298215000339

ABSTRACT: The music of Jakob Ullmann (b. 1958) is notable for its
protracted structural stasis and delicacy; its fusion of rigorously en-
gineered notational systems, abstract graphical elements and Byzan-
tine iconography; andabove allits unrelenting quietness. This
article offers a rare view into Ullmanns compositional practices,
with a specific focus upon the role of fragility in the work. Exploring
this concept of fragility as a musical feature, this article considers a
number of Ullmanns works from the perspectives of the composi-
tions and their scores, the performance and the agency of perform-
ers, and finally how audiences may listen to this fragility. The paper
concludes with a consideration of the importance of fragility to
Ullmann's oeuvre, and of how it might help us to further understand
his music.

PRECARIOUS SOUNDS AND FRAGILE MUSIC: INTRO-

DUCTION
The work of German composer Jakob Ullmann (b. 1958) operates at a
point of liminality. Quietoften to the point of near-inaudibilityit
constantly balances on the brink of fracture and self-effacement. The
scores obscure themselves: they are otherworldly lexical palimpsests
for the performer to decode, with each composition employing its
own idiosyncrasies and paradoxes. Frequently operating in extreme
quietness, Ullmanns music is vulnerable, and on numerous occa-
sions this has proven its own undoing in performance. Easily perfo-
rated by the smallest sound, concerts have been aborted due to audi-
ences interruptions in the face of such unrelentingly quiet music.2
Despite its fragility, however, the music is uncompromising and de-
mands the complete focus of its performers and listeners alike. Per-
haps then this mysterious and delicate music is a reason why

1
I am grateful to Jakob Ullmann for his patience and kindness in our
correspondences and to James Lavender for his invaluable thoughts on early
drafts of this research.
2
After an aborted attempt in 1990, Son Imaginaire III (1989) was only
successfully premiered in 2013 at the Huddersfield contemporary music
festival. Abi Bliss, Jakob Ullmann: quiet please, hcmf// 2013 programme
material <http://www.hcmf.co.uk/Jakob-Ullmann-quiet-please> [accessed 14
April 2015]
 Oliver Thurley

Ullmanns work has been largely overlooked beyond mainland Eu-

rope. Only in recent years have sporadic performances outside Ger-
many and a number of acclaimed recordings on the Berlin-based rec-
ord label Edition RZ contributed to a slowly rising murmur of inter-
est in Ullmanns music. Yet still relatively little remains known of the
composer and his work.3
Son of the theologian and politician Wolfgang Ullmann (b.1929
2004), Jakob Ullmann was born in Freiburg, growing up and begin-
ning his career behind the Iron Curtain. Ullmannwho is currently
professor at the Hochschule fr Musik, Baselstudied church music
in Dresden, and after being denied entry to the academy of fine arts
studied privately with Friedrich Goldmann (b.1941 2009). Like
many in East Germany during this period, Ullmanns career was sti-
fled by the political situation and his access to the works of compos-
ers from Western Europe and America was limited. Ullmann was
persecuted throughout the late 1970s and early 1980s by the Stasi
and imprisoned repeatedly for his refusal to undergo military ser-
vice.4 Listening to Ullmanns work, one immediately notes a subdued
and struggling atmosphere, and it does not require a significant
stretch of the imagination to draw links between the socio-political
circumstances of his early career and the subsequent characteristics
of his art.
This article aims to situate fragility within the music of Jakob
Ullmann, as well as to provide something of an introduction to the
inner workings of his compositions. By examining a number of po-
tentially fragile situations in Ullmanns compositional practice, re-
lated performance issues, and finally the precariousness involved in
listening to such quiet and static music, I hope to develop a clearer
conception of how the music may be understood in relation to this
notion of fragility.
In order to begin, an initial working definition of musical fragility
is necessary as a point of orientation. A musical situation may be
considered fragile if the normal functionality of a soundor the
means of its productionis somehow destabilised and placed at risk
of collapse. Fragility, then, can be understood as a precarious state in
which sound is rendered frangible and susceptible to being destroyed
or disrupted. To compose a fragile sound or musical event would
therefore involve organising a system either: a) vulnerable to disrup-
tion by some small external force; or b) positioned upon an unstable
foundation such that the system collapses under its own weight.

3
In the UK particularly, a cover profile in The Wire magazine has done a
good deal towards introducing new audiences to Ullmann. See Nick Cain, Jakob
Ullmann: East of Eden, in The Wire magazine (Issue 350: April 2013), pp. 3843.
4
Ibid., p. 42.

2
DISAPPEARING SOUNDS: Fragility in the music of Jakob Ullmann

THE SCORE AS LABYRINTH: LAYERING AND FRAG-

MENTATION IN SOLO III
To consider closely the compositional aspects of fragility in
Ullmanns practice, it is necessary first to turn to his scores to better
understand his communication of the music. Visually striking and
meticulously detailed, the scores often combine traditional notation
and abstract graphic elements; they are ornate systems layered with
fragments of mystic iconography and runes, effaced or buried by the
traces of elements torn from ancient religious texts. At first glance
one might draw comparisons with the scores of John Cage,5 Horaiu
Rdulescu or Sylvano Bussottialbeit steeped in Byzantine rites and
other liturgical traditions.
In many of Ullmanns scores the notional palimpsest
superimposed writings which obscure older material, spatialising
memoryis never far away.6 The layering of musical traces through-
out the scores efface and obscure other fragments, creating a laby-
rinth of parts which one must read between, each trace layer re-
contextualising and imposing upon the others around it. Each score
is rigorously constructed and requires careful decryption on the part
of the performer to decipher its subtleties and idiosyncrasies, and to
solve its puzzles. Despite its quietness and fragility, any notion of
Ullmanns music as minimal is deceptivethe scores reveal a Byzan-
tine complexity. Reading between the layers of the score, it appears
that Ullmanns compositions are alive and evade petrification at eve-
ry point, often remaining prone to interpretation and paradox, the
various traces making it impossible to view the piece from a single
perspective. Each score thus exists in a metastable state that, once
dissected, quickly unravels to reveal a complex lattice of fragile ele-
ments. Here, then, the score is encountered as a fragile assemblage
of musical elements, interwoven and vulnerable to misinterpreta-
tion, relying on a performers careful reading and delicate touch to
prevent the music from collapsing in upon itself.

5
The importance in particular of Cages influence upon Ullmann should not
to be underestimated and deserves greater discussion. Theirfor Ullmann,
profoundmeeting is succinctly commemorated in the work Meeting John
Cage under the Tropic of the Late Eighties oder Wir berholen die Moderne
(1988-89).
6
Indeed, palimpsest is also the title of Ullmanns work Komposition 9
(Palimpsest) (198990), inspired by a fragmented radio broadcast of Anna
Akhmatovas poetry. In Ullmanns voice, books and FIRE series (1990), the
palimpsest is manifested literally: the score is formed by layers of torn scraps of
religious texts and cryptic icons, abstract shapes and colours burying musical
instruction. The voice, books and FIRE series stands as a major coup in
Ullmanns catalogue, and one I shall reserve for closer attention at a later date
in another place.

3
 Oliver Thurley

Ullmanns Solo III (199293, revised 2010/12; part of a series of five

works to date) offers us an example of a fragile and fragmented com-
position. Written for organ, the piece is modular in its format. Last-
ing for any duration over 25 minutes, Solo IIIlike the other pieces
in the seriesmay be performed as either a solo,7 a solo with elec-
tronic modification, or alternatively in combination with any other
pieces from the Solo series.8

FIGURE 1. Structure 1.1-1.2 page excerpt from Solo III. Ariadne Buch &
Musikverlag. Used by permission.

The score to Solo III is presented not as a unified linear representa-

tion of the piece, as is common with the majority of Ullmanns
scores,9 but rather as a deconstructed assemblage of parts. The task
presented by the score, then, is to construct the piece in order to
realise it. In its unadorned solo version, the piece is typically quiet
and consists of multiple parts: a faint pedal tone is suspended
7
The nomenclature solo here is perhaps deliberately misleading, especially
when considering that even a standard solo organ performance requires an
additional 3 assistants to operate all the manuals and stops as required.
8
The Edition RZ release, Fremde Zeit Addendum [1-3] (2012) features a
recording of Solos I+II+III performed together, and an additional disc (Fremde
Zeit Addendum 4 solo III fr Orgel (2013)) was later issued, featuring a solo
performance of Solo III lasting around 66 minutes.
Jakob Ullmann, Fremde Zeit Addendum [1-3] (Edition RZ, Ed. RZ 1026-28,
2012).
--------------------, Fremde Zeit Addendum 4 solo III fr Orgel (Edition RZ,
Ed. RZ 1029, 2013).
9
A number of Ullmanns larger works make use of some form of time-space
notation, often employing time-brackets reminiscent of Cages later number-
pieces to breathe a temporal flexibility into the structures.

4
DISAPPEARING SOUNDS: Fragility in the music of Jakob Ullmann

throughout the entire piece, whilst a central slow-motion cantus fir-

musa 13-tone row with radial symmetrydissolves between shades
of tonality and air-noise. Occasionally, the piece is perforated by
brief, almost granular flurries of isolated notes which organist Hans-
Peter Schulz refers to as a chaotic vortex, a kind of sonic dust,10 (see
figure 1). These structures also employ transparencies to determine
elements of pitch or rhythmic content. Finally, a number of pages of
graphic systemsin which colour becomes an important notational
variableuse a different set of scattered transparencies to plot dura-
tional vertices and various structural features of the piece (see figure
2). In addition to these main compositional elements, separate nota-
tion systems are included to govern control of the organs stops and
the degree of movement of the keys (see figure 3). Through its frag-
mentation, the score to Solo III deconstructs the organ as an explod-
ed view diagram; a manual for reassembly in performance.

FIGURE 2. Graphics page 1, from Solo III. Ariadne Buch & Musikverlag. Used by
permission.

Ullmanns scores are never to be interpreted freely or used as mate-

rial for improvisation; instead they require the performer to carefully
prepare their interpretation ahead of performance, deciphering ac-
cording to the rules and material provided. Depending upon the de-
sired duration of the performance, sections of Solo III can be scaled,

10
Hans-Peter Schulz, About solo III, accompanying essay to Fremde Zeit
Addendum 4 (Edition RZ, 2013), p. 1. <http://www.edition-
rz.de/Media/3/195/1/4348.pdf> [accessed 14 April 2015]

5
 Oliver Thurley

repeated, or certain alternative decisions can be made from the

available material according to Ullmanns instructions. This flexibil-
ity allows the form of the piece to be recombined and manipulated
giving the performer a degree of autonomywithout altering the
sonic character and identity of the piece: the physiognomy of Solo III.

FIGURE 3. Manuals and key pressure page from Solo III. Ariadne Buch &
Musikverlag. Used by permission.

In fragmenting the score, Ullmann has founded the composition up-

on unstable ground, rendering it fragile. Presented with the pieces of
a fractured score, it is the task of the performer to reassemble the
piece into a multidimensional yet cohesive version of events, and to
prevent it from collapsing into noise over the course of the perfor-
mance. In their independence, isolated score fragments have the po-
tential to break up the wider continuity of the piece, oras we shall
see laterto destabilise the air flow within the organs pipes depend-
ing on minute variable of the particular combination of parts chosen.
In its deconstruction, Solo III is already rendered fragile as the score
itself has been destabilised and made vulnerable to disruption by
other trace layers of the score. Once again, the concept of the pal-
impsest is crucial: the score is spatialised and requires the interpret-
er to overwrite the various traces or fragments of the piece, re-
contextualising the various separate threads of the score whilst all
the time maintaining the extremely quiet dynamic level which veils
the entire piece. In his framing of the score as an already fragmented
work, Ullmann has effectively surrendered agency of the piece to the
emergent behaviours of the instrument, creating fragile sounds
which falter and risk collapse as the instrument resists the perform-
er. The very process of reconstruction in performance becomes a
precarious activity as the piece ultimately attempts to survive in a
perpetual state of coming apart.

6
DISAPPEARING SOUNDS: Fragility in the music of Jakob Ullmann

THE SCORE AS MICROSCOPE: TETRACHORD TUNING

SYSTEMS IN A CATALOGUE OF SOUNDS
Considering the fragmentation and layering in works such as Solo III
as a macroscopic perspective of structural fragility in the composi-
tionsa fracturing of the musics formit is also important to as-
sess how fragility manifests itself at the microscopic level of
Ullmanns work. Through the incorporation of hyper-precision into
elements of his more traditional notation, Ullmann uses the score as
a microscope in order to zoom-in on the sound-world of his music,
and to explore fragility from a new perspective.
Throughout a number of his scores, Ullmann works at this micro-
scopic level, using elaborate notational systemsoften centring
around parametric chartsto control musical variables such as
pitch, bow pressure and movement, breathing and timbre changes.
The constant fluctuations and meticulous nature of the notation re-
quires a continuous readjustment of playing technique. At the mac-
roscopic level the structure often seems static, avoiding any formal
telos or expression; close-up the music is, in fact, in perpetual motion
beneath its surface. It is the constant movement of these tiny varia-
bles in performance which causes fragile disruptions, as musical
events are constantly tampered with and undermined or destabi-
lised. Pitches are never allowed to settle, but instead waver uneasily;
dynamics are not even, but shake erratically. In dogmatically follow-
ing the notations degree of precision, there is no leeway for the per-
former to stabilise events should they begin to collapse. As will be-
come apparent, Ullmanns music never allows performers to drop
their guard or get comfortable, and the fluctuations and precise
tremors in the scores give the music much of its unsettling energy.
A Catalogue of Sounds (199597) is written for string ensemble of
thirteen instruments and up to three optional soloists.11 Despite the
catalogue of the title, there is little in the way of indexical elements:
the piece functions as a largely static and homogeneous texturea
macroscopic monolith of microscopic fragments woven together. It
is in these fragments that Ullmanns use of notational precision and
parametric charts reveal a disruption and emergent fragility in great-
er clarity. Throughout A Catalogue of Sounds and a number of his oth-
er scores,12 Ullmanninfluenced by Greek-Byzantine tonal sys-

11
There is some confusion surrounding the A Catalogue of Sounds score and
parts. The original score was lost and although the sketches are no longer
extant, Albert Brier notes that the earlier version featured up to 13 additional
solo parts. Parts 1-10 remain lost, whilst 11-13 have been recreated using
fragments and extrapolations of the remaining string ensemble parts, creating a
rather different role than the original versions. Albert Brier, The Learning of the
Ear: On Jakob Ullmanns Composition A Catalogue of Sounds, CD liner notes in
A Catalogue of Sounds (Berlin: Edition RZ, Ed. RZ 1017, 2005) pp. 8-9.
12
The system also prominently features in various forms in Disappearing
Musics (198991), Horos Metoros (200809), La Segunda Cancin del Angel

7
 Oliver Thurley

temsemploys a novel approach for navigating pitch space within a

tetrachord. Positioning pitched material upon a precarious and un-
stable foundation, Ullmann appears to render the navigation of pitch
space fragile and vulnerable to disruption. The system subdivides the
octave into 68 equal units (with tetrachord as 28 units), and charts
out 9 scales in the scores instruction pages (see figure 4). Each scale
is constructed in steps of the new units, signalled in the score by a
corresponding number and rune marking to signal permitted degree
of fluctuations. For example, in A Catalogue of Sounds the eighth scale
of the system comprises interval steps of {9, 12, 7, 9, 12, 7} units (Fig.
4). These scales are then mapped onto a chart in the score, whose
boundaries are specified by the preceding interval shown on a stand-
ard clef. From here, a plot on the chart signals the pitch motion over
time, relative to waypoints of the scale intervals (see figure 5). Essen-
tially, Ullmann provides a close-up in the score of an initial fixed in-
terval, and then directs the movement of pitch according to various
non-traditional subdivisions of that interval. Whereas Solo III created
a figurative exploded view of the organ, here Ullmann seems to
zoom-in on the resolution of the traditional stave; providing a new
perspective and more room for movement within a smaller space.

Desaparecido (201113) with a more primitive version appearing as far back as

the first Komposition fr Streichquartett (198586).

8
DISAPPEARING SOUNDS: Fragility in the music of Jakob Ullmann

FIGURE 4. Octave subdivision system from A Catalogue of Sounds. Ariadne Buch

& Musikverlag. Used by permission.

FIGURE 5. Excerpt of page 1, showing the chart notation of the 68-unit octave
subdivision (scale !8, see figure 4) for violin 4; from A Catalogue of Sounds.
Ariadne Buch & Musikverlag. Used by permission.

Operating with such precision, Ullmanns notation is able to eschew

calcified notions of traditionally tempered pitch, instead shifting fo-
cus to a movement through pitch space guided by unfamiliar way-
points. Each point on the pitch chart is gauged relative to an imme-

9
 Oliver Thurley

diately preceding position rather than a central tonal dogma, destabi-

lising and decentring the musics prevailing tonality. The plotted
traces never move smoothly, or with clear intent; they are fragile and
in a constant state of flux, trembling and making hesitant deviations
from their course (Fig. 5). Ullmann notes that microtonality and al-
ternative tunings are not his concern here, but rather a move to erase
the memory of specific locations in pitch space.13 The palimpsest re-
veals itself again; the traditional pitch system is partly effaced and
written over, and in doing so, our conception of regular pitch space is
transformed through the presence of a new fragile trace. What is in-
teresting in this system is Ullmanns use of relatively constrained
focus of the manipulations. The fluctuations of pitch are rarely flam-
boyant gestural glissandi in the manner of Iannis Xenakis,14 but ra-
ther smaller, delicate fluctuations between limited intervals.15 This
compositional asceticism further maintains the sense of fragile stasis
and homogeneity prevalent in Ullmanns work; a subtle disruption to
an otherwise straightforward technique.
By using the score as a microscope, Ullmann is able to notate tiny
dynamic tremors in pitch that at any other scale would seem incon-
sequential. Here, fragile sounds appear explicitly in the score: tenta-
tive and unstable fluctuations of pitch that destabilise both tradi-
tional pitch systems and the evenness of sustained tones which form
the work. In composing in such minute detail, Ullmann focuses at-
tention towards these tiny soundswhich at this volume may or may
not be audible and/or intentionaland coaxes them to the fore-
ground of the piece. Through the exhausting physical requirements
and the microscopic detail of these parts there is a sense that this
fragile nature brings about a new relationship between the performer
and their instrument. Rather than simply compose a single sustained
noterequiring no real instrumental proficiencyUllmanns scores
demand a back-breaking amount of effort to bring about relatively
small rewards. The instrument is reframed and instead of disappear-
ing from awareness and simply becoming an extension of the per-
formers being, it makes itself all too present: an obstacle which must
be negotiated with and fought against, even where success is unlike-
ly.

13
Jakob Ullmann in email correspondence with the author, 28 September
2013.
14
The influence of Xenakis UPIC sketches is clear throughout Ullmanns use
of graphics. It is also worth noting that Xenakis mentions a similar adoption of
Greek-Byzantine pitch systems in his book Formalized Music. Iannis Xenakis,
Towards a Metamusic in Formalized Music, rev. edn (New York: Pendragon,
1992), pp. 180-201.
15
In the score to La Segunda Cancin del Angel Desaparecido (201113),
Ullmann employs a system of notation for small fluctuations in pitch, this time
glissandi deviating (often within constraints of less than a quarter tone) relative
to a proximal pitch.

10
DISAPPEARING SOUNDS: Fragility in the music of Jakob Ullmann

II

RESISTANCE, BARGAINING AND TORTURE: OVERCOM-

ING THE INSTRUMENT
The realisation of Ullmanns work requires its own degree of virtuos-
ity and calls for performers to approach their instrument from a new
perspective. Whilst the complexity of the work is not immediately
confrontational or particularly theatrical in its difficulty (in part, no
doubt, due to its quietness), often what is called for in the music re-
quires an exhausting struggle against various constraints and ob-
structions. As with the fragmentation of Solo III and the microscopic
fluctuations in A Catalogue of Sounds, this strain creates an atmos-
phere of fragility in performance: a tension that the piece could col-
lapse at any moment. Indeed, the extreme quietness of performance
functions as an additional source of fragility, as many of these tech-
niques are rendered vulnerable to even the smallest disturbance. In
many fragile scenarios, Ullmann appears to exploit some vulnerabil-
ity within the performer-instrument relationship, placing a strain
upon it or calling for the performer to operate beyond the limits of
the system. In doing so, the performers instrument becomes as
much a burden as it does an enabling prosthesis.
Under normal circumstances, the instrument should perhaps not
present itself as an obstacle to performance, but facilitate it, with-
drawn from the performers direct attention, behaving as expected.
Ullmanns music on the other hand begins to metaphorically break
the instrument, forcing it to the forefront of the performers atten-
tion as it is no longer able to carry out its intended purpose. The de-
stabilisation of the instruments regular functionality renders it frag-
ile, and it becomes precarious: the performer must take extra care to
overcome the resistance of the instrument. Rather than take the in-
strument (or performer) for granted as a simple opaque tool, this
fragility calls for a more nuanced relationship between performer
and their instrument, forcing the performer to reassess the limita-
tions and vulnerabilities imposed by the music. Ullmanns music
tests the fragile boundaries of what the instrument (and performer)
can do before sound loses cohesion and slips either into noise or col-
lapses into nothing. In the following examples, situations are exam-
ined in which instruments actively resist performers, leading to ne-
gotiation and a trade-off between control and accuracy. Ullmanns
performers must learn to overcome the fragility of their instruments.
Oboist Molly McDolan speaks of such a confrontation with her in-
strument when performing Ullmanns work, referring to a requisite

11
 Oliver Thurley

torture of instruments16 in her approach. In .

dramatisches fragment mit Aischylos und Euripides (200809) [hereaf-
ter referred to as Horos Metoros],17 Ullmann writes above the stable
range of the oboe da caccia rendering the performance fragile as
pitch becomes precarious and prone to collapse. This destabilising
required McDolan to fight against her instrument and make various
strenuous efforts to achieve the desired pitches and quiet dynamics,
albeit at a cost to control.18 McDolan refers to the sonic results as a
wondrous realm of instability,19 wherein sustained tones tremble
and glissandi become unstable as they falter and strain against col-
lapse. Unlike the carefully notated tremors seen in the score to A
Catalogue of Sounds, here similar instabilities appear unintentionally,
brought about through a destabilisation of the instrument and the
performers attempt to coerce it into cooperation. Such a struggle to
achieve relatively muted results in performance is indicative of much
of Ullmanns work. Often the compositions presuppose the limita-
tions of an instrumental system, exploiting vulnerabilities and push-
ing performers beyond the possibility of an accurate performance.
This ensures that fragility is audibly manifest as a tension between
performer and their instrument. By creating and applying pressure to
these weak-spots in the performer/instrument relationship,
Ullmann can increase the chance of rupture during performance, or
reframe the performers relationship to their instrument, rendering
it an obstacle to content with. As in the case of the oboe da caccia
part in Horos Metoros, if a particular sound is ostensibly possible it
may only be the case under certain constrictions (i.e. through use of
preparations, extended techniques, or limited dynamic range). Al-
ternatively, a sound which is typically performable may be under-
mined and destabilised by external conditions (such as extreme qui-
etness), resulting in the emergence of fragility.
McDolans comments resonate with Frank Hilbergs liner notes to
the 1996 Wergo portrait CD, which also alludes to a tortuous20 na-
ture embedded in Ullmanns music. In the first instance, this may
seem a strange analogy for such a restrained and soft music, but, for

16
[E]ine Art Folterung des Instruments [authors translation]
Molly McDolan quoted in Michael Kunkel, Ankunft Basel, Badischer Bahnhof
in Kunkel, Liesch, and Petry (eds.), Dreizehn 13 - Basels Badischer Bahnhof in
Geschichte, Architektur und Musik (Saarbrcken: PFAU, 2012), p. 151.
17
Horos Metoros is written for solo soprano, 3 choir groups, 3 auloi, oboe
da caccia, percussion, and string trio.
18
This includes changing reeds, using tape to partially cover fingering holes,
biting down on the reed, and searching for alternate fingerings, which allow
certain glissandos and overtones to sound. Kunkel, p. 151.
19
Damit bin ich im Wunderreich der Instabilitt [authors translation]
McDolan quoted in Kunkel. p. 151.
20
Frank Hilberg, CD liner notes in Jakob Ullmann: Komposition Fr
Streichquartett / Komposition fr Violine / Disappearing Musics, trans. by J.
Bradford Robinson (Wergo, WER 6532-2, 1996) p. 21.

12
DISAPPEARING SOUNDS: Fragility in the music of Jakob Ullmann

all its quietness, the music remains unrelenting. This notion of a tor-
tuousness in performance is particularly clear in Ullmanns writing
for strings in works such as A Catalogue of Sounds, Komposition fr
Streichquartett 2 (199899), and the more recent La Segunda Cancin
del Angel Desaparecido (201113). In addition to the labyrinthine nota-
tional systems discussed previously, techniques employed by
Ullmann often involve performers attempting to overcome technical
and mechanical difficulties and then protracting them to the point at
which they become physically gruelling. In the writing for strings,
difficult fingering positions (often a combination of awkward
stretches, open strings, and harmonics) and methodical bow move-
ments become painful when prolonged for an extended period and
restricted to such quiet dynamics. Over the course of a 70-minute
performance, this near-continuous discomfort is not to be underes-
timated. Any fluctuation in the players hand position or musculature
may therefore cause these precarious sounds to falter or even col-
lapse completely; Ullmann places the production of sound at risk of
being crushed by the very system he has constructed.

FAILURE, OR: SOMETIMES THE SYSTEM WINS

During the recording of Solo III,21 Ullmann recounts that organist
Hans-Peter Schulz was at first unhappy with his performance on the
recording, due to the unpredictable behaviour of the instrument:

I told him that he misinterpreted the title of the piece. I said: this is not a
solo for an organ-player it is a solo for organ. So the o r g a n played the
piece. You only helped the organ to produce sounds. The piece is com-
posed in a way that it is really impossible to control what happens.22

The solo is constructed such that despite all preparations and efforts
of the performer, the system remains fragile and will inevitably act
according to its own agency, breaking up or producing various com-
bination and difference tones and overtones. In Solo III the organ
relies upon so many fragmented variables that, as Ullmann points
out, it is impossible to control what happens.23 In these situations,
the best a performer can hope for is to attempt to constrain the in-
stability of the system that Ullmann has set in play, accepting that
sometimes the instrument will defeat them.
As noted earlier, the score strikes a balance between its openness
in how performers may approach the piece, and retaining its own

21
Jakob Ullmann, Fremde Zeit Addendum 4, 2013.
22
Ullmann, in email correspondence with the author, 25 March 2014.
[Ullmanns emphasis].
23
Ibid., 2014.

13
 Oliver Thurley

identity through an elaborate system of rules. The outcome of the

piece remains open in exactly how the various inevitable chaotic be-
haviours will unfold during performance. The scores instructions
note that any form of expression must be strictly avoided, and
Schulz notes that in following the score directions closely, the per-
formers interpretational leeway in pressing the key is thus reduced
to approximately one millimetre.24 Despite Ullmanns call for preci-
sion and stability in the performance, this asceticism only serves to
tie the hands of the performer, removing their ability to control (and
potentially tame) the destabilisation of the instrument. In the per-
formance of Solo III, the quietness results in an insufficient amount
of air moving through the instruments pipes, inevitably causing in-
stabilities in pitch and a breaking free from the performers control.
The implication of the piece being for organ underscores the notion
that audiences are not listening to the performer but rather the in-
strument itself.
In attempting to overcome the instruments resistance, Schulz
notes that Solo III calls into question the identity of the organ as a
traditional keyboard instrument and driving instrument in the de-
velopment of Western European polyphony.25 In pre-empting the
instability of the organ, Ullmann evolves the instrument from a tem-
pered system into one capable of performing an aleatoric and intan-
gible glissando-polyphony.26 The layering up of the fragmented score
systems produces unpredictable results through the superposition
of the different chaotic oscillation processes within the pipes and
wind channels of the historic instrument.27 Solo III transforms the
organ into a fragile wind instrument: unstable and resisting attempts
to control it. The imperfections of the instrument and its resistance
of the performers will are the foreground of the music. In Shulzs
recording then, audiences are listening to the instrument struggling
to breathe: the death rattle of the organ.

In the operatic Horos Metoros, Ullmann again exposes the vulnera-
bility of an instrument. He calls on the second choir group (one
male, one female voice) to sing their part as a single, uninterrupted
pitch (E3) between themselves for the performances entire dura-
tion. Over the course of 50 minutes, lyrics become blurred and where
one player pauses to breathe, the other must takeover continuing the
same pitch and avoiding any interruption in the tone. As with many
of the techniques already discussed, the concept is deceptively sim-
ple, yet the execution is incredibly taxing on the performers. Over

24
Schulz, 2013, p. 1.
25
Ibid., p. 1.
26
Ibid., p. 2.
27
Ibid., p. 1.

14
DISAPPEARING SOUNDS: Fragility in the music of Jakob Ullmann

the course of the piece, fluctuations of pitch inevitably occur as the

pair becomes fatigued and the timbral differences within each voice
become more apparent to the listener. Unlike the microscopic trem-
ors of A Catalogue of Sounds, fragility emerges from the macroscopic
event. On paper, the score part has zoomed out, condensing the en-
tirety of the piece into a single bar (see figure 6). However, during
performanceby protracting the note ad nauseamfocus is drawn
inside the tone, exposing all the complexities and blemishes within.
50 minutes is a long time for a single sustained pitch and tension
gradually builds between the performers as they inevitably drift and
strain to prevent any breaks in their continuous tone.28 In the exam-
ples discussed above, the instrument has been the obstacle to per-
formancepresenting itself as a point of resistance to the perform-
ers execution of the score. For the second choir group of Horos Me-
toros, however, resistance stems from the performers themselves.
Unable to break their continuous tone, the performers rely on each
other in a fragile relay system. If this relationship breaks down, the
other performer is left gasping and the tone collapses.

FIGURE 6. Choir group 2, bar 1; excerpt from Horos Metoros. Jakob Ullmann.
Used by permission.

In each of the musical situations assessed so far, a sense of precari-

ousness in performance has been common throughout the appear-
ances of fragility. Ullmanns music appears sparse because of its qui-
etness and stasis, but one quickly discovers that beneath its surface
the music requires an excruciating effort to prevent it from implod-
ing. This is a fragility of intention: the composer has called for a mu-
sical event which may not be possible without back-breaking effort
and a compromised stability (as in Horos Metoros), or it may easily
collapse in on itself during performance (as in A Catalogue of Sounds
or Solo III). Each of these pieces exhibits some form of fragility,
which manifests itself audibly as the tiny tremors and momentary
destabilisations of sound that become amplified as both points of
focus and tension in our listening. In these fragile performance situa-

28
One is reminded of Marina Abramovic & Ulays performance artwork,
Breathing In / Breathing Out (1977) in which the two performersmouths
connected and noses pluggedshare each others oxygen. With one breathing
in as the other breathes out, eventually the pair runs out of oxygen.

15
 Oliver Thurley

tions, instruments resist musicians, reframing their traditional roles

as obstacles to be reckoned with rather than simple tools. In doing
so, performances of Ullmanns music break away from calcified no-
tions of performance and virtuosity, instead working towards the
creation of music that is more nuanced and fragile.

III

LISTENING: QUIETNESS AND FOCUS

The works discussed so far exemplify Ullmanns propensity for ex-
treme quietness throughout his work. This quietness holds an im-
portant function of fragility in the music, not simply in its role as a
destabilising mechanism in performance, but also in the reception of
the work. In considering the act of listening in Ullmanns work, a
paradox appears which has remained unaddressed until now: quiet-
ness draws the listeners attention into the music, revealing new di-
mensions, yet the music simultaneously attempts to evade focus
through its quietness and static structure. The strain of such pro-
tracted performances in quiet stasis is not only gruelling for the per-
former; the music requires a similar effort on the part of its audience
and should not be underestimated.29 The music never makes any sort
of expressive gesture; it remains brittle throughout, presenting the
listener with a constant and unrelenting soundscape that balances
precariously at the brink of perception: a fragile listening experience.
Listening to such quiet music, audiences must attempt to focus
their full attention in order to immerse themselves inand thus ex-
periencethe work. Barthes and Havas make the distinction that
[h]earing is a physiological phenomenon; listening is a psychological
act.30 To consider listening as being predicated upon hearing, it
follows that if ones ability to hear a piece of music clearly is disrupt-
ed then listening cannot take place. Quiet music requires careful and
sustained concentration; if a listener loses their focus, they lose their
grip on the work and are forced outside of the music. In this sense,
the extreme quietness of the music renders the listening experience
fragile through its reframing of audibilitytypically a given for audi-
encesas a precarious element of the music. In their strain to hear
(physiologically), listeners (psychologically) become more attentive
to these smaller sounds in performance. Noises that may otherwise
prove inconsequential become amplified from the listeners closer,
more intimate perspective, or disappear where concentration (or au-
29
It is worth nothing that these are not short pieces, but ambitious
undertakings for both performers and audience: Ullmanns compositions since
2000 each have an average duration of just over 60 minutes.
30
Roland Barthes and Roland Havas, Listening, in The Responsibility of
Forms, (New York: Hill & Wang, 1985), p. 245. Emphasis in original.

16
DISAPPEARING SOUNDS: Fragility in the music of Jakob Ullmann

dibility) falters. In this sense the conditions of performance (the

quietness, the protracted durations, etc.) destabilise and undermine
not only the performance but also the act of listening itself, making
it a more arduous task.
This is the central paradox about the fragility of Jakob Ullmanns
work. The musics quietness requires great focus to reveal its intrica-
cies, yet in being so quiet it makes focus all the harder and destabi-
lises its intricacies by restricting the performers actions. In turn the-
se unstable sounds cause more complexities in the sonic texture, yet
remain quiet and thus difficult to focus upon. Ullmanns scenario has
a fragile foundation; one which begins to crumble over the course of
performance. This paradox of quietness underpins the fragility in-
volved in listening to Ullmanns music: quietness causes instability,
but also renders listening vulnerable to disruption from that instabil-
ity. Bernd Leukert notes that [l]oud music forgoes the subtleties of
perceptible sound. Thus, Ullmann creates a quiet music in order to
give himself and his listeners the opportunity to hear more, and bet-
ter.31 A wonderful paradox: it is the audiences hearing less that en-
courages them to listen more and discover hidden details within the
music.

HOMOGENEITY AND STASIS

Listening to A Catalogue of Sounds, the notion of its three solo parts
seemsas in Solo IIIsomewhat peculiar since the music functions
as a vast, singular sonic object that remains broadly static for over 70
minutes as slowly-bowed sustained tones make glacial fluctuations
into and out of noise, infrequently punctured by small percussive
sounds. Like many of Ullmanns compositions, A Catalogue of Sounds
favours a form of structural stasis built around protracted homoge-
neous textures. Within these unwieldy static blocks of sound, how-
ever, a timbral fragility remains apparent as an emergent property of
smaller musical fragments inherent instability. Each individual part
in the ensemble behaves according to its own fragile situation (some
navigating an alternative pitch space, others encountering tortuous
fingering positions), all weaving together at times to create a com-
plex and impenetrable sonic gestalt, which obscures and veils its own
identity. For the listener, the music presents itself as sound in con-
stant flux, which although constantly moving, has no clear telos and
never goes anywhere. This stasis too is a function of the fragility in
Ullmanns work as ones ability to listen to the work is made precari-
ous, vulnerable to a temporal disorientation rather than disturbance
or collapse.

31
Bernd Leukert, CD liner notes in Fremde Zeit Addendum [1-3], trans. by
Laurie Schwartz (Berlin, Edition RZ, 2012), p. 10.

17
 Oliver Thurley

In much the same way as the quietness of Ullmanns performanc-

es calls for a heightened attentiveness in the audiences listening, the
structural stasis of the pieces accentuates the listeners sensitivity to
the most subtle changes in the texture. In A Catalogue of Sounds, the
role of the solo initially seems attenuated, almost evading focus ra-
ther than attracting it. In its quietness and glacial movement, the so-
lo appears simply a thin sonic trace; rarely protruding from the gen-
eral homogeneous veil of the ensemble to state an intention. Howev-
er, in the listeners heightened state of attentiveness, and against the
relative structural stasis of the piece, even the faintest emergence
above the surface of the music such as this can have a relatively pro-
found effect. Although the role of the solo survives then, the results
are disorientating: it too is fragile because of a perceived vulnerabil-
ity and precariousness in its positioning amongst a static homogene-
ity. Only becoming apparent for fleeting moments, as instruments
surface and call attention to themselves, the solos soon fall back into
the static abyss of the ensemble. Here, works such as A Catalogue of
Sounds blur the listeners ability to identify what is being heard in a
densely fused homogeneous stasis. For instance, parts sporadically
become unthreaded from the group. It is only then that a listener is
able to focus upon elements of the soundscape, separating them
from parts blurred and obscured by the quiet timbral homogeneity
and structural stasis.
The delicate nature of Ullmanns work leaves only a faint trace
upon the listeners perceptual memory; the extended durations and
structural stasis play a key role in the blurring of ones ability to re-
call and separate out distinct moments of the piece. This apparent
temporal stasis in Ullmanns music makes it difficult for audiences to
pick out moments by which to orientate their fragile listening expe-
rience; further obfuscating and distorting the temporal experience.

DISLOCATED SPACE IN HOROS METOROS

For the audience at the first performances of Horos Metoros, a sense
of space was dislocated, rendering the listening experience fragile as
once again the paradox of quietness appears. Ullmann specifies that
the performers must remain hidden throughout, preferably located
in a separate space from the audience. The piece thus attempts to
actively destabilise the audiences attention whilst also requiring de-
voted attention to the smallest sonic details. Written for the cen-
tenary of Basels Gare du Nord,32 Ullmann situates the performers in
rooms adjacent to the audience, whilst the percussion is located be-
low the audience for a spatially immersive performance. During the
performance, musicians move (whilst playing) between the various

32
A former railway station, now a performance centre for arts and new
music in Switzerland.

18
DISAPPEARING SOUNDS: Fragility in the music of Jakob Ullmann

locations, creating an unseen, spatially dynamic listening environ-

ment for the audience. In the staging of Horos Metoros, Ullmann cre-
ates an anti-proscenium performance, a theatre of the invisible, al-
luding to the Pythagorean notion of the acousmatic. With the vocal
parts in particular, this produces the unnerving effect of an eternal,
omnipresent acousmtre:33 an unseen haunting voice imparting
fragments of Aeschylus and Euripides tales from beyond the visual
field.34
By removing any visual presence of the performance from its au-
dience, Horos Metoros eschews clear identification, and with it ones
ability to orientate and parse exactly what is being heard and from
where creating a fragile, easily disturbed listening experience. Here it
is worth considering the piece in the lineage of Cages 433 which
opened up the concert space to redefine all sound as musical. In
Horos Metoros, the music comes from outside the performance space,
calling into question the role of the concert hall itself as the medium
for performance: as with Cages silence, the audience is forced to
treat all sounds which permeate the membrane of the hall as equal
and worth listening to. Timbrally, the obstructing architecture of this
fractured concert space also has an effect upon listening as the
sounds of instruments and their spatial location become masked by
walls, corridors, ceilings and floors. Ones ability to distinguish indi-
vidual sound sources is only further distorted by this acoustic veiling
of performers which, to some extent, highlights the homogeneous
nature of the musics texture. The sounds heard are disembodied,
and by lacking a visual referent to tie the auditory and visual field
together, Horos Metoros engages the audiences auditory imagina-
tion, but makes the listening experience all the more vulnerable to
disruption as sounds disappear or become effaced. In avoiding and
obscuring its own identity in this manner, Ullmanns work seems to
occupy a strange interstitial space, outsideeven in spite of
normal space and time.

FRAGILITY IN CONCLUSION
Ultimately, the feature of Ullmanns music which contributes most
to its sense of fragility is its quietness. Constraining performers ac-
tions and beckoning audiences to strain and focus their attention in
order to hear, this quietness heightens their immersion into the
piece. This precarious sonic environment, together with a composed
structural stasis in the work, serves to enhance the state of temporal

33
Michel Chion, The Acousmtre, in The Voice In Cinema, trans. by Claudia
Gorbman (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999), pp. 17-29.
34
Specifically, they are both Aeschylus and Euripides telling of The
Suppliants, sung in the original Greek.

19
 Oliver Thurley

obfuscation in the listening experience, creating a fragile tension

with the listeners heightened focus.
Fragility itself is not a feature clearly found within the scores, and
to some degree it evades easy analysis for this reason. Instead, the
scores make space for fragility to occur in the performers interpreta-
tion through the fragmentation and palimpsestic layering. Perform-
ers must attempt to decipher the score into a playable form and in
doing so create a foundation for the piece upon which not all the ma-
terial is strictly performable. A surfeit of precision in a number of
pieces also seeks to destabilise the performer in a similar way: re-
stricting the players space for interpretation and guiding them into
unstable scenarios. Situations also occur in which Ullmann appears
to push beyond the regular limitations of an instrument in order to
bring about fragility during performance. By exploiting these bound-
ariesor, as seen in the strings, protracting uncomfortable tech-
niquesUllmanns music becomes fragile, transforming static tones
into faltering, shaking or gasping sounds in spite of their quietness.
Fragility, then, is bound up in this seemingly contradictory play:
focusing audience attention into small sounds, yet at the same time
evading this attention. The quietness, structural stasis and homoge-
neous textures evade clear focus; whilst the tension created as per-
formers wrestle with their instruments to overcome instabilities,
draws listeners into the musiccaught up in the drama of this fragil-
ity. It is here, in this paradox of quietness, that the work truly is
placed at risk of collapse: not at the hands of the performers, but
from its listeners. If the audience is unable (or unwilling) to immerse
itself in this paradox, then the music finally collapses.

20