Sync or Swarm: Group Dynamics in Musical Free Improvisation

David Borgo, University of California, San Diego

Joseph Goguen, University of California, San Diego

Background in Music Improvisation

Improvisation has received some scholarly attention, although its emphasis on in-performance creativity and interaction often defies the standard musicological tools of the trade and accepted methods for evaluating competency and aesthetic value [5]. Our existing analytical tools, derived in great part from the study of European notated music, are inadequate for a better understanding of the freer forms of group improvisation that have developed since the 1960s. These approaches tend to avoid pre-established harmonies, melodies, rhythms, forms–and often any strong idiomatic components–in favor of the dynamic and self-organizing qualities of ensemble interaction and exploration [1].

Background in Nonlinear Dynamical Systems

In any system that involves cooperation or competition and in which the whole is greater than the sum of its parts the governing equations must be nonlinear. Several recent scientific approaches aim to model these nonlinear problems of communication and control including: catastrophe, chaos, complexity, criticality, and network theories. While the full complexities of musical performance are still beyond the scope of these approaches, their emphasis on nonlinearity and dynamics offers insight into the complexities of musical production, interaction, and reception.

Aims

By applying insight and vocabulary from nonlinear dynamical systems theory–including attractors, bifurcations, and phase transitions–to the analysis of group free improvisation, we aim to discover patterns of ensemble interaction and to develop more appropriate and precise ways to discuss the dynamics of improvised performance.

Main Contribution

In order to apply these ideas with some rigor, we are developing an algorithm to compute minimum complexity descriptions of temporal sequences that can assign an “entropy” to each subsystem of a complex system and, in turn, give rise to a “complexity profile” for an entire piece [4]. And we look to seminal recordings of free improvisation [6] and first-hand ethnographic interviews with improvisers (in this case the celebrated saxophonist Sam Rivers) to identify common types of interactions and transitions within group performance [2 and 3]. By treating the temporal trajectory of improvised music as a multi-dimensional “phase space” and defining an energy function based on a structural information measure, we hope to model and discuss the ways in which coherence and incoherence, synchrony and disruption emerge in performance in both intended and unintended ways to shape a collective order.

Implications

We are only in the early stages of investigating the nonlinear dynamics of complex systems involving social interaction and human cognition and creativity. But these interdisciplinary approaches are already encouraging in their ability to offer alternate perspectives, vocabularies, and analytical strategies. While the allure of musical improvisation may continue to be its inherent unpredictability, a better understanding of the dynamics of ensemble performance will only highlight the subtleties of its form.

References

[1] Bailey, Derek. 1991. Improvisation: Its Nature and Practice in Music. London: The British Library National Sound Archive.

[2] Borgo, David. 2003. "Negotiating Freedom: Values and Practices in Contemporary Improvised Music." Black Music Research Journal 23/1 (Spring).

[3] Borgo, David. 2002. “Synergy and Surrealestate: The Orderly-Disorder of Free Improvisation.”Pacific Review of Ethnomusicology 10.

[4] Goguen, Joseph. 1977. “Complexity of Hierarchically Organized Systems and the Structure of Musical Experiences.” International Journal of General Systems 3, pp.233-251.

[5] Nettl, Bruno, ed. 1998. In the Course of Performance: Studies in the World of Musical Improvisation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

[6] Rivers, Sam. 1998 [1973]. Trio Live. GRP CD 278.

First Author

NAME: David Borgo,

CURRENT POSITION: Assistant Professor of Music, U.C.S.D.

MAIN RESEARCH DISCIPLINES:

  • Ethnomusicology, Jazz and Popular Music Studies

MAIN RESEARCH AREAS:

  • African American Music, Improvisation, Cultural Studies, Cognitive Science

RELEVANT QUALIFICATIONS:

  • B.M. Jazz Studies and Saxophone, Indiana University
  • M.A. and Ph.D. Ethnomusicology, U.C.L.A.

CONTACT AND FURTHER INFORMATION

Second Author

NAME: Joseph Goguen

CURRENT POSITION: Professor of Computer Science and Engineering, U.C.S.D.

MAIN RESEARCH DISCIPLINES:

  • Computer Science, Cognitive Science, Philosophy of Music

MAIN RESEARCH AREAS:

  • Software Engineering, User Interface Design, Social and Ethical Aspects of Science and Technology

RELEVANT QUALIFICATIONS:

  • Bachelors, Harvard; Ph.D. UC Berkeley
  • Positions at Berkeley, Chicago, U.C.L.A, Oxford

CONTACT AND FURTHER INFORMATION