Steve Reich's Tehillim, A Brief Discussion, by Payman Akhlaghi, Music Composition Graduate Paper, 2000, UCLA

A Brief Discussion of Steve Reichs Tehillim A Graduate Level Research Paper Submitted Toward the Degree of MA.
/PhD in Composition Author: Payman Akhlaghi Winter 2000, UCLA
The present paper is published as it was at the time of submission, aside from minor formatting modifications. Score samples are not provided with this edition. P.A., 2012
A Brief Discussion of
Steve Reichs
Tehillim
By: Payman Akhlaghi
Music 266B
Prof. David S. Lefkowitz
Winter 2000 UCLA
(*) March 23, 2000
Page 1 of 18 www.ComposerPA.com 2000, 2012, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved
A Brief Discussion of Steve Reichs Tehillim A Graduate Level Research Paper Submitted Toward the Degrees of MA. & PhD in Composition Author: Payman Akhlaghi Winter 2000, UCLA
Introduction
Tehillim (1981) is an intriguing piece amongst Steve Reichs entire oeuvre. While its origins might be traced back to Reichs earlier compositions, which had primarily employed the so- called phasing technique as their main structural device, Tehillim manifests more a departure from, than a continuation of, the phase period. Besides, Tehillim seems as important within the general context of the post-modern minimalist trends of the 80s and beyond. Yet, because of its multifaceted musical conception, it does not lend itself easily to a dichotomic stylistic categorization, i.e. its hard to place Tehillim with much exactitude within either Reichs own brand of modernist-minimalism (or minimalist-modernism), or the post-modern musical world of the time. With Tehillim, Reich clearly leaves behind the primacy of process and the supremacy of rhythm alone, two of the conspicuous features of his earlier music, and instead, he embraces a more comprehensive view of the compositions sound-world, by devising longer melodic lines and rhythmic patterns (as opposed to the previously short fragments), timbral diversity (as opposed to his earliest mono-chromatic compositions), globally traditional formal considerations (a 4 part structure, with a sequence of fast-fast-slow-fast tempi, reminiscent of the symphonic tradition), and quite importantly, by employing multiple singing lines and formalized text. Also, Tehillim does not show an attempt to absolutely reject extra musical references, or connotations, while at the same time, it does make a conscious effort to deny them of finding an overwhelming prominence. In this way, the
Page 2 of 18 www.ComposerPA.com 2000, 2012, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved.
music tries to avoid the danger of compromising its own internal syntactical integrity. The enchanting world or Tehillim seems to be both accessible enough for the initiated listener, and sophisticated enough for the mature musician. With Tehillim, Reich officially acknowledges the role of the audience and its natural needs and limitations, to be as important as the composers intentions and ideals, as well as the performer[s]competency and devotion. The present paper tries to reach a tentative conclusion on Tehillims stylistic niche in the music of the late twentieth century, through the presentation of some general background data, an analytical survey of the piece, a comparative study of the works salient characteristics against some of the sources to which it seems to refer, or from which its seems to draw, and an overall conclusion. Since Tehillims main theme resonates with some aspects of the composers personal and spiritual life, it seems prudent to first draw our attention to some pertinent biographical details.
Background
Steve Reich was born in 1936, New York, from Jewish parents of European decent, who were soon divorced. He recounts J. S. Bach, Stravinsky, and the jazz of the forties (e.g. Miles Davis) as his earliest influential musical discoveries. A percussionist from the age of 14, he received his bachelor in philosophy, and only then decided to devote himself entirely to music. Soon he met Phillip Glass at Julliard, and went on to study with Luciano Berio, one of the few icons of high modernism. Later, he diligently studied West African drumming, as well as the Gamelan music, drawing ideas and
inspirations from both for his future compositions, without falling into the trap of direct imitation. An earlier contact with the emerging Terry Reiley, and in particular, participating in the premiere of In C, had already led him to the development of the basic principles of phasing. Its Gonna Rain (1965) and Come Out (1966) represent two outstanding concrete pieces of Reichs earliest mature style. One (or more) short patterns of recorded spoken word with a discernible melodic contour, and certainly a clear rhythmic character, begin in unison with themselves, and gradually go out of phase, i.e. desynchronize. The contrapuntal result becomes further complicated as more tracks are added. In retrospective, the technique seems to have been essentially rooted in the modernist attitude toward the pre-compositional decisions, despite apparent differences, such as the source material or the more or less mathematical functions that are employed in such music. Here, too, a function, which consists of the perceptible process of systematic desynchronization, is applied to a short rhythmic (or melodic) pattern, in order to generate a structurally coherent musical composition. Yet, at the same time, this unique process itself, can be viewed as an extension of the centuries long canonic technique. Later on, Piano Phase (1967) through Drumming (1971) show an increasingly mature application of the technique in the live medium. The music of this period, because of its extreme economy of the source material, has come to be known as Reich minimalist music. Yet, Reich was soon to reject his previous conviction, that of the primacy of the process, adopting a less didactic (his word) notion, which eventually resulted in Music
for 18 Musicians (1976). (For a detailed discussion of the above see Schwarz, 1996, Chapter 2.)
The path to Tehillim (1981), however, would not have been completed if it were not for Reichs aroused interest in, and his subsequent devotion to, Judaism, about which he hadnt learned much as an assimilated Jew. Concentrated studies of the Jewish Bible and Hebrew language introduced him to the Jewish cantillation, its associated musical traditions, and its symbolic notation. Reich went as far to visit a Yemenite elderly in Israel who would sing him verses of Psalms in the now almost lost, thousand years old tradition of Jewish Psalmody. Ultimately, all of these were to culminate in his pivotal composition, Tehillim.
The Jewish Cantillation
The printed text of the Jewish Bible, including Psalms, besides the set of vowels, employs a system of teamim, i.e. small symbols placed above or below the letters, which indicate both the stress of the words, and more importantly, their associated modal or melodic patterns. A cantor, who is familiar with these [culturally learnt] patterns, can sing through the text, in a combination of preset melodic patterns and tasteful improvisation. Besides, generally speaking, each verse of the text is composed of an antecedent and a consequent phrase, each with their own beginning and ending modal/melodic associations.
Yet, despite the adoption of the technique by almost all Jewish congregations, today the modes and the melodies are region specific. Furthermore, while the singing tradition of the Pentateuch has been generally preserved, this has not been the case for the tradition of Psalm singing. Nevertheless, this process of creating long melodic lines out of a set of smaller fragments, in different orders, proved fruitful to Reichs upcoming composition. The Jewish Bible, and specially the Psalms, are also abundant with musical references, from the names of the instruments to certain musical occasions. Altogether, it seems understandable that Reich would decide to choose the text of his first vocal composition in years, from his newly cherished Jewish liturgy.
Tehillim (1981)
The word is the Hebrew plural for Tehillah, meaning Psalms. The text of Tehillim consists of selected verses from four different Psalms, with specially the last one (No. 150) being well known, at least because it has been set to music by almost any Western spiritual composer. (For a translation of the text see Attachment 1.) In his preface to the score, Reich mentions that while the choice of the instruments responds to the text, such as the percussions (Tof, Sounding Cymbals, and Clanging cymbals), clapping, the wind (Ugav), the strings (Minim), and certainly, the human voice, no other musicological association has been intended. He also says that he has preferred the text of the Psalms over the Pentateuch, because unlike the latter, there is [almost] no surviving living oral tradition of the former, thus allowing him to compose
melodies freely, without a living oral tradition to imitate or ignore. (Reich, 1981, Preface to the score). However, after hearing the music, one can assert that, nevertheless, the text and the music have formed a mutually responsive association. To begin, the text is ordered in such a way that a satisfying sequence of tempi (fast-fast-slow-fast) could be employed, while the tempo, and the atmosphere of each Part (movement) would still faithfully reflect the general sentiment of each excerpt. The music of the first, second, and the fourth Parts sound in accordance with the joy and the awe of praising God by the world (I), the bright message of longevity and good fate (II), and the jubilance of the invitation to praise God with music (IV). On the other hand, Part III assumes a darker modal atmosphere, as the writer prays directly to God, somewhat asking for His mercy and forgiveness. Moreover, as Reich says, the meter of music here comes directly from the rhythm of the Hebrew text and is consequently in flexible, constantly changing meters. (ibid). Indeed, the music is mostly so, rarely deviating from the natural stress and inflection of the words. The meter of the piece is made of two basic units of 2 and 3 group of eighth notes, in constantly changing combinations. For the ease of performance, the score has adopted a conducting line, thus marking the groups of 2 with a vertical line ( | ), and the groups of 3 with a triangle ( ). (It is not known to me, however, if each extracted part shows these markings, too.) Tehillim is scored for 4 amplified womens voices, winds, 2 electronic organs or synthesizers (non-amplified), percussions, and strings. For the ensemble version the number of the string players is 1.1.1.1.1., all amplified; in the chamber orchestra version,
however, the numbers increase to 6.6.4.4.1, with only the double bass being amplified. (For a detailed list of the instrumentation see Attachment 2.) The four singers, as well as the strings, are required to avoid vibrato, the former clearly instructed to sing as is the way in the performances of the early music. The dynamic range of all parts is confined mostly to an evenly leveled mezzo forte, with strings occasionally accenting their attacks. Thus, the dynamic shape of the piece becomes largely a factor of the contour and register of the melody, the density of the texture, and the number of instruments playing simultaneously. As Part IV, with its obvious climactic role arrives, the controlled dynamic plato of the musical parts is mostly compensated by an increase in tempo, and a call for tutti, where for the first time, the high pitched piccolo and crotales join the ensemble at rehearsal letter (S), as the culmination of a gradually additive process. This way of managing the dynamism of the music has resulted in a haunting understatement of sentiments, itself one f the propelling forces of the piece, and something that the composer is specifically aware of. (Schwarz, 1996) Part I starts with a trio of voice 2 (v.2, the lyric soprano) that lays out the entire first excerpt of the text along a long melodic line, and the joint statement of a long rhythmic line by clapping 1 (clap.1) and one tuned tambourine (without jingles). Soon, the clarinet joins the voice in unison, while clap.2/tamb.2 form a rhythmic canon with clap.1/tamb.1. After another round of verse, v.1, doubled by cl.1, assumes the lead, while v.2/cl.2 enter canonically. Then, strings join the ensemble, sustaining a matrix of long chords underneath the melodic and rhythmic activity above them. At (F), an abrupt change of texture occurs; the clarinets are replaced by two manual organs, strings become
silent, and maracas jingling announces the beginning of a four part canon, stated by the four voices (alto and high soprano added), each doubled in unison by one hand of the organ players. Within a few bars, the clap./tamb. rhythmic lines withdraw, and strings resume, as the texture mainly remains consistent, until at (BB), v.2/cl.1 begin a 23 bar accelerando, against tamb.1, tamb.2, and maracas, with a texture that recalls the opening of the piece. An additive process begins, first by the entrance of tamb.3, tamb. 4, and strings, and soon by v.3/cl.2. But this time, instead of the former canon, they stay in parallel rhythm with v.2/cl.1, which in effect form consecutive parallel 6ths, 3rds and 4ths below v.2/cl.1. This technique is reminiscent of the medieval organums and the early modal counterpoint. Part I ends in a fade out of the voice, while the reduced percussion continue their rhythmic line in an attacca into the second Part. The parallelism of v.2 and v.3, this time instead doubled with the double reeds (ob.1/2, and E.H./Bn., respectively), begins Part II, against the rhythmic line of clap.1/tamb.1. Son strings, still stating sustained chords, and clap. 2/tamb. 2, with a contrasting rhythmic pattern, join the ensemble. At (C), for the first time, the voices withdraw long enough to give the instrumental section a chance to exhibit an extended prominence. Voices return, this time three, still moving in parallel rhythms, with different intervallic configurations, mainly implying incomplete triadic structures. Subsequently at (F), they withdraw again, coming back at (G) through an additive process; first, v. 2 and v.3 resume a two-part parallelism, and then they are joined by v. 4 through the end of the movement.
Part III is perhaps the most different of all. Here, in a responsive fashion that perhaps recalls the antiphonal liturgical tradition, common to most Jewish congregations, as well as the early Christian tradition of Psalmody, v.2 begins by answering v.4 a 5th below. This clearly provides the consequent of the first melodic phrase, while it further clarifies the text, because in this excerpt, the antecedents and consequents of each verse are further divisible to an antecedent and consequent. The movement is slow, and a dark modal timbre combines with a mellow percussion section (marimba/vibraphone) to heighten the effect, while tambourines do not reappear until the very end of the movement. Clapping is absent too, and it will not come back through the rest of the piece. Still, the wind and organs, whenever present, continue to double one of the voices in unison. Interestingly, strings find a more active role in Part III, eventually uttering melodic gestures. And in a curiously referential move, as also noted by Schwarz (1996),the word ee-kaysh (perverse) is painted with a melodic, and then harmonic Triton, a clear reminiscent of the centuries old view of this interval as the devil in music, a notion that well continued into the basic principles of the common practice period. When the four voices reappear, they continue the antiphonal texture of the opening of the movement, this time with a 2 by 2 grouping, and with more intervallic and harmonic diversity. As in Part II, Part III does not use any extended canonic texture beyond the aforementioned responsive antiphony. Finally, strings melodic ascent to A6, expands the tessitura of the composition, and prepares the ear for the eventual appearance of C5 in the high soprano line of Part IV, which arrives after an accelerando/attacca.
In the finale, while strings mainly resume providing a sustained harmony against the rhythmic/melodic activity of the other parts, their occasional attacks give them more prominence than in the first two Parts. This is while the doubling of the voices with the wind remains consistent. The general crescendo shape of the movement emerges as a generally additive process, coupled with an expansion of the vocal range, and an increase in tempo at (S), gradually take place. Once more, as in Part I, the canonic technique is employed, though less extensively than in the latter. This I because two relatively long sections are devoted to a parallel vocal texture, and toward the end, a 2 by 2 response on the word Halleluiah, recalls the antiphony of Part III. In effect, Part IV seems to be a symphonic conclusion, recapitulating the preceding Parts, in the basic sense of the word.
Melodic and Harmonic language
Certainly, the overall impression of the melodic language is a modal one. However, as Schwarz (1996) has mentioned, certain aspects of the melodic line can also be traced back to the basic principles of the Jewish cantillation. As it was mentioned before, the general method of singing the Jewish liturgy can be explained as tasteful chaining of certain pre-set modal/melodic fragments, in different orders, according to the sequence of the symbolic indication of teamim. This results in a long-stretched satisfying melody, which is essentially composed of those shorter fragments. As an example of the adoption of such technique in Tehillim, lets examine the structure of the opening melody, in Part I. (See Attachment 3.)
The most striking structural pattern seems to be the cadential D4-E4 (marked as (a) in the attachment). This pattern consistently occurs at the last two syllables of each consequent phrase, except for the last (a), where only the antecedent of the verse has been used. Fragments (b) and (p) have a relatively similar pitch content, as do (d) and (e), (f) and (g), (j) and (i), (g) and (l). Besides, higher order intervallic and contour relations can also be observed, as upward and downward 5ths and 4ths are abundant, in addition to repetition at different pitch levels (k, c, j), or inversions of the fragments (m, versus k, j, or c). Although the basic principles of this kind of melodic construction can be also found in the works of a more distant composer such as Prokofiev, nevertheless Reichs application of the technique remains special, because of basing the overall melodic flow on the natural patterns of speech. As himself has noted (Reich, 1981, Preface to the Score), the result is a piece based on melody in the basic sense of that word. Moreover, the length of the melodic line alone is something that had been absent in Reichs previous works. (This attention to the relationship between speech and music would ultimately flourish in his future masterpiece, Different Trains (1988).) A general survey of Part I also reveals the composers special attention to the interaction of the canonical lines, as the head of melody in the imitating voices becomes slightly modified (G4 to B4). This, in addition to the different time lag for each entering
voice, reflects a concern for the clarity of the text, as much as rhythmic considerations. This controlled modification of the melodic material is in contrast with Reichs earlier phase pieces, where the secondary sounds were left to emerge entirely as the result of the
mere application of the process to the constant basic musical pattern. Such control is evident throughout all four Parts of Tehillim. The modal language of the melodies, in combination with the non vib. style of performance, canons, and the aforementioned use of the Triton in Part III, further indicate a possibly referential intention to another early tradition of psalmody, i.e. the Gregorian chant. If we accept Harvard Dictionary of Music, which maintains that some aspects of the Gregorian chant could be traced back to the oral traditions of the Jewish congregations, this gesture appears to be even more appropriate (Harvard, 1986; under Gregorian Chant), although it should be also noted that this idea has been opposed by some of the other scholars (Grout, 1988; ch. 1, The Early Christian Church.) Furthermore, the application of rhythmic and intervallic parallelism to the voices, specially in Parts II and III, seems to be another indication of referential intentions, first to the medieval practice of organum, which would double the principle melody a 5th (or 4th) below. Secondly, however, Tehillims deviation from the rigidity of the organum system has led it to explore other types of intervallic resolutions, mostly similar to the later practice of modal counterpoint. Still, despite the above, the music proves too subtly constructed to allow yielding itself to a mono-dimensional analysis. Not only the percussive lines (at times, themselves bringing the earlier phasing technique to mind) add one or more contrasting layers to the composition, the harmonization of the melodies further enhances a modal ambiguity that has already been established within the melodies themselves. For example, lets again consider Attachment 1, this time examining its modal implications. When heard alone, it is not clear if the melody belongs to which of the following modes, G-dorian, APage 13 of 18 www.ComposerPA.com 2000, 2012, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved.
phrygian, or their plagal modes, D-hypodorian (a.k.a. D-aeolian), and E-hypophrygian (a.k.a. E-lucrian). The strings' chordal structure only adds to this ambiguity (see Attachment 4). The extended tertiary harmony is perhaps a reminder of Reichs earlier influences by the jazz medium, while his evident mastery of blending these harmonies with the modal melodies gives the piece a uniquely personal sound. In another interesting move, the composer manages to diversify harmonic surrounding of the melodies by modulations that only affect the chordal structures, without altering the pitches of the melodies. This is evident as the key signatures change from B to F#, F#-D#, and B , and it is achieved as the pitches of the respective melodic
sections are common to the modulating keys. In Part II, enharmonic spelling of the melody has allowed for a similar modulation, with the key signature alternating between 4 flats and 5 sharps, and even exploring 5 flats, again without affecting the pitch content of the melodies, and again, while strings are allowed to explore quite audible accidental alterations. The melody itself, is once more invested with modal ambiguity, as its forms different modal configurations by the way of changing the implied tonic pitch. For example, the two contrasting A -ionian and A#-aeolian can be aurally discernible.
Also interestingly enough, the music begins extending syllables over several pitches, which recalls the mellismatic cantillation, common to both Jewish congregations and the Gregorian chant. Besides, the cadential points of the phrases begin to elongate,
e.g. on the word ve-rad-fay-hu, which reminds of the centuries long tradition of rhythmic augmentation. Although an exhaustive presentation of Parts III and IV seems to be out of the scope of this paper, certain observations could prove useful to our discussion. Part III assumes a darker modality (C#-aeolian), while occasional employment of the raised 6th or the lowered 5th (raised 4th) degrees act as chromatically tonicizing devices for the 5th above. The latter also creates the C#-G Triton, used to paint the word ee-kaysh. (See above). More remotely chromatic modulations are found in this Part than any of the other three. The abundance of harmonic P.4ths and P.5ths in the vocal voice leading and the strings, further recalls the tradition of organum (see above). Part IV returns to the original D-aeolian (?) mode of Part I, while it eventually culminates in a more or less jubilant, yet ambiguous, D-ionian.
Evaluation
Based on the above observations, it can be said that unlike Reichs earlier compositions, Tehillim does not fully reject musical connotations, as long as they are suitable to the overall world of the piece, and more importantly, as long as they do not jeopardize the internal integrity of the composition. Although a detailed analysis, a sample of which was provided before, could point out certain traceable influences in isolation, the overall sound of the work is much more than the sum of its parts. The presence of long melodic lines, clearly defined rhythmic and melodic layers, a most controlled textural organization, (to some extent) multi-timbral sonority, and the presence
of a long stretch of text, are mostly new to Reichs compositional output up to this point. And despite the aforementioned possibly traditional associations, the sound world of Tehillim is absolutely distinct from any of those traditions alone. On the other hand, in certain respects, Tehillim can still be understood as an extension of Reichs earlier concerns. His experiments with canonic process go back as early as Its Gonna Rain, Come Out, and the later development of the technique for live mediums, as in Piano Phase and Drumming. The percussive world of Tehillim owes as much to the phasing technique as to Reichs earlier exposure to the West African drumming (the additive process), and Gamelan music (the use of metalophones, in this case crotales, besides the adoption of a layered structure). Again, the evident interest of the composer in the relationship between the natural speech and music in Tehillim, which shows its origins in his earliest compositions, points toward some of his future output, e.g. Different Trains, and perhaps The Cave (1990-1993). The apparent repetition of basic patterns relates directly to Reichs modernist-minimalist period. Dr. David S. Lefkowitz has defined post-modernist music as the one in which musical artifacts are used for their connotations rather than their denotations. I have already proposed an essentially similar definition, stating that while modernism could be viewed as concentrated attention to musical syntax, post-modernism in music is identified by its primary concern for semantics. I think the second definition eases the adoption of a less dichotomic categorization by allowing for a continuous spectrum. Considering all of the above, Id like to think of Tehillim as a precocious child of what I call The Age of Reconciliation. Tehillim is no more a reaction; it no more hates the past for the mere sake of internal cohesion, and at the same time, it avoids an
unbridled eclecticism that would certainly compromise its musical integrity. This highly structured music, also exhibits an evident concern for the audiences, as well as the performers, perceptual capacity; beautiful melodies and colorful harmonies, each with their own modal implications, endow the meticulously constructed skeleton with a pleasing flesh. Timbral considerations and formal decisions further move the work away from what Reich has called the didactic aspect of his earlier music. Finally, all of these combine to relegate the perception of the processes themselves in favor of the overall sound world of the composition. In this respect, and at this point, I think Tehillim does not easily fit within a bipolar categorization of the music of the past two decades. With its roots in modernism, its manifestations of the post-modern minimalism, and its foreshadowing referential eclecticism, perhaps Tehillim is a piece of the future, cast in 1981, which will well suit Dr. Lefkowitzs (and my) view of the future of music, where a successful convergence of the two poles will be possible. Even if I am exaggerating on the visionary merits of Tehillim, I still believe that it has succeeded in showing and paving the way toward that future.
Bibliography
Farmer, H. G., A History of The Arabian Music To The XIII Century, 1929/1967; tr. to Persian by Bashi, B./ Ch. 1
Grout, D. J., Palisca, C. V., A History Of Western Music, 4th Ed., 1988; Norton and Company/ Ch. 1, The Early Christian Church

Psalms, Original Hebrew Text Randel, D., Ed., Harvard Dictionary of Music, 1986, Bilknap/Harvard Press; Under Gregorian chant Also Quoted In Mansouri, P., The Fundamental Theory Of Music (Persian)
Reich, S., Tehillim (1981), Score; Boosey and Hawkes Reich, Steve, Tehillim (1994), Sound Recording; Schnberg Ensemble, With The Percussion Group, The Hague; cond. Reinbert de Leeuw
Schwarz, K. R., Minimalists, 1996; Phaidon Press Simms, B. R., Music of The Twentieth Century: Style And Structure, Ed. 2, 1996; Schirmer Books
Watkins, G., Soundings: Music In The Twentieth Century, Ed.1, 1995; Schirmer Books/Simon and Schuster

Steve Reich's Tehillim, A Brief Discussion, by Payman Akhlaghi, Music Composition Graduate Paper, 2000, UCLA

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Steve Reich's Tehillim, A Brief Discussion, by Payman Akhlaghi, Music Composition Graduate Paper, 2000, UCLA

Caricato da

Copyright:

A Brief Discussion of Steve Reichs Tehillim A Graduate Level Research Paper Submitted Toward the Degree of MA.

/PhD in Composition Author: Payman Akhlaghi Winter 2000, UCLA

Prof. David S. Lefkowitz

Winter 2000 UCLA

(*) March 23, 2000

Page 1 of 18 www.ComposerPA.com 2000, 2012, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved

Page 4 of 18 www.ComposerPA.com 2000, 2012, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved.

The Jewish Cantillation

Page 5 of 18 www.ComposerPA.com 2000, 2012, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved.

Page 9 of 18 www.ComposerPA.com 2000, 2012, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved.

Melodic and Harmonic language

Page 11 of 18 www.ComposerPA.com 2000, 2012, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved.

Page 12 of 18 www.ComposerPA.com 2000, 2012, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved.

Page 18 of 18 www.ComposerPA.com 2000, 2012, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved.

Potrebbero piacerti anche