Piazzolla’s Tango Etude no.

3:

Interpretation in Practice

Josephine Lagerlow

BMus (Hons)

A thesis submitted for the degree of Master of Philosophy

at the University of Queensland in 2017

School of Music
Abstract

This paper outlines a number of factors with relation to performance interpretations of

Astor Piazzolla’s Tango Etude no. 3. Information gathered from analysis of form and

potential interpretive practices as supported in literature was synthesised and used to aid in

a discussion of recorded performances of the work, with regard to idioms found in the

language of tango. The commentary presents each interpretation with reference to

Hellaby’s hierarchical system, focusing on broad aspects of performance which in turn

shape, and are shaped by, more detail-oriented aspects. It was found that there were

significant variations in interpretations of the same work with regard to the choices made in

performance. It is intended that this work assist performers in more effectively conveying

an informed interpretation of Piazzolla’s Tango Etude no. 3, with the potential for further

understanding of the language of tango through this piece’s function as a practical case

study.

ii
Declaration by author

This thesis is composed of my original work, and contains no material previously published

or written by another person except where due reference has been made in the text. I have

clearly stated the contribution by others to jointly-authored works that I have included in

my thesis.

I have clearly stated the contributions of others to my thesis as a whole, including statistical

assistance, survey design, data analysis, significant technical procedures, professional

editorial advice, and any other original research work used or reported in my thesis. The

content of my thesis is the result of work I have carried out since the commencement of

my research higher degree candidature and does not include a substantial part of work that

has been submitted to qualify for the award of any other degree or diploma in any

university or other tertiary institution. I have clearly stated which parts of my thesis, if any,

have been submitted to qualify for another award.

I acknowledge that an electronic copy of my thesis must be lodged with the University

Library and, subject to the policy and procedures of The University of Queensland, the

thesis be made available for research and study in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968

unless a period of embargo has been approved by the Dean of the Graduate School. I

acknowledge that copyright of all material contained in my thesis resides with the copyright

holder(s) of that material. Where appropriate I have obtained permission from the

copyright holder to reproduce material in this thesis.

iii
Publications during candidature

No publications during candidature.

Publications included in this thesis

No publications included.

Contributions by others to the thesis

Cassandra Slater, flutist, assisted in collaborating with the author in performing Piazzolla’s

Tango Etude no. 3 as part of the performance component of this degree.

Samuel Dickenson assisted in collaborating with the author to typeset the harmonic

analysis of Tango Etude no. 3 found in the appendix section of this thesis.

Statement of parts of the thesis submitted to qualify for the award of another degree

None.

iv
Acknowledgments

I would like to acknowledge my supervisor, Dr. Peter Freeman, and my teacher Mr. Patrick

Nolan for their assistance, time and effort during this degree. Many thanks to Elizabeth

Farrington, who assisted greatly with the administrative aspects of the degree, and Dr.

Warwick Potter, Dr. Simon Perry and Dr. Liam Viney for their feedback.

Many thanks to all of the players who performed alongside me during the two recitals that

made up the performance component of this degree, with considerable dedication of time

and effort. Thanks to the researchers and performers at Reed College’s Tango for

Musicians, with special thanks to Paulina Fain for her valuable feedback and assistance.

Finally, the Graduate School International Travel Award contributed greatly to the

firsthand research possible during this period of study.

v
Keywords

music, music performance, music analysis, performance analysis, recording analysis,

Piazzolla, tango, tango nuevo, flute, flute performance

Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classifications (ANZSRC)

190407, Music Performance, 100%

Fields of Research (FoR) Classification

FoR code: 1904, Performing Arts and Creative Writing 100%

vi
Contents

Piazzolla’s Tango Etude no. 3: ..........................................................................................................i

Interpretation in Practice ...................................................................................................................i

Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1

Life and experiences ......................................................................................................................... 5

About the tangos ............................................................................................................. 7

Musical analysis: Subjectivity and its function ............................................................ 7

Chapter 2: Literature Review ......................................................................................................... 11

Analysis of music........................................................................................................... 11

Tango .............................................................................................................................. 13

Piazzolla’s life, works, and tango nuevo .................................................................... 14

Chapter 3: Methodology ................................................................................................................ 17

Data collection ............................................................................................................... 19

Coding............................................................................................................................. 21

Chapter 4: Findings and Discussion............................................................................................. 23

Form and structure ................................................................................................... 23

Potential interpretive practices of tango idioms ................................................... 28

Practical execution of the work as demonstrated by recordings ........................ 33

Comparisons .................................................................................................................. 41

Chapter 5: Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 46

Personal reflection .................................................................................................... 46

vii
 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 47

References ........................................................................................................................................ 48

Appendix A: Tango etudes and harmonic skeletons ................................................................. 53

Appendix B: Piazzolla’s Adiós Nonino: Score/performance comparison. ............................ 57

viii
List of Figures

Ex. 1. Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). Opening rhythmic motif, bar 1. ....................... 24

Ex. 2. Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). Secondary A motif, bar 16. ............................... 24

Ex. 3. Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). B section, bars 40-42.......................................... 25

Ex. 4. Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). B section repeated harmonic outline, bars 32-

35. ...................................................................................................................................................... 25

Ex. 5. Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). Phrase extension and change of rhythmic

ostinato, bars 47-48......................................................................................................................... 26

Ex. 6, Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). Harmonic skeleton of C. ................................... 26

Ex. 7, Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). Bars 49-50; beginning bars of C. ...................... 27

Ex. 8, Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). Bars 55-56; repetition of initial melodic material

with more complexity. .................................................................................................................... 27

Ex. 9. Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987), bar 26-27. Demonstration of paired notes in

which the “inward-outward” or “semi-slurred” motion could be appropriate in execution.

........................................................................................................................................................... 31

ix
List of Figures

Figure 1. Types of analysis and progression. .............................................................................. 18

Figure 3. Characteriser usage. ......................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Figure 2. Tempo table for sections of Tango Etude no. 3. ..... Error! Bookmark not

defined.

Figure 4: Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). ............................................................. 53

Figure 5. Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). Harmonic skeleton outlining chords

as written in accompaniment and accented notes within each bar. Lagerlow, Dickenson,

2016. .................................................................................................................................................. 55

Figure 6. Piazzolla, Adiós Nonino (1959). Here shown with score reproduction as

written on top line, with transcription of one method of execution in performance by Fain

(2016). ............................................................................................................................................... 57

x
Chapter 1: Introduction

“There has been a remarkable absence of any educational systematic process of the
tango language throughout the history of tango.” (Possetti, 9)

This paper will discuss the possibilities found in Piazzolla’s Tango Etude no. 3 with

respect to performance interpretation, as well as aspects of form, harmony, and historical

context. This etude is the third of six that Piazzolla wrote for the flute and is untitled other

than its tempo indication of Molto marcato e energico. As a part of the modern solo flute

repertoire, these etudes are widely performed within the classical world; however, the score

leaves significant scope for interpretation. This thesis contributes to the author performing

Piazzolla’s etudes as part of the performance component of a Masters of Philosophy.

Given the nature of tango music as a genre and Piazzolla’s methods of

embellishment in performance, interpreting the score without an understanding of its

context could be considered ill-advised from a performer’s viewpoint. Piazzolla’s blend of

jazz, classical and tango is one of the defining features of his compositional style, later

referred to as tango nuevo1. Tango Etude no. 3 functions well as a starting point for a practical

discussion of tango performance, assisting the Western classical art music player in viewing

tango nuevo works with different interpretive possibilities. This paper assists the performer in

finding a focus to view different interpretations of the score, whether it be as urtext2

through written material or as a broader guideline.

“Many performers refer to a score as “the music”. This is wrong, of course.”

(Rink, ed. Hill, 129)

1 “New tango”.
2 Commonly defined as the original version of a text, to which later publications can be compared.

1
 The function of performance analysis as an academic field is a continually evolving

form of research. Despite differing approaches, it is evident that most within the field agree

on the benefits of analysis with regards to artistically and musicologically satisfying

interpretations3, as discussed by Cook, Hellaby et al.

Many views exist toward the level of engagement necessary for an artistically

satisfying performance with the written score. The same applies to the objectivity of any

given musical analysis and the level of personal engagement desired on the part of the

listener; indeed, these things are by their nature subjective. Stravinsky and Lawson write of

this, suggesting:

It is taken for granted that I place before the performer written music wherein the
composer’s will is explicit and easily discernible from a correctly established text.
But no matter how scrupulously a piece of music may be notated, no matter how
carefully it may be insured against every possible ambiguity through the indications
of tempo, shading, phrasing, accentuation, and so on, it always contains hidden
elements that defy definition, because verbal dialectic is powerless to define musical
dialectic in its totality. (123)

There has always been much detail which a composer did not trouble to write in his
scores; he simply knew that certain conventions would be observed. Those
elements of style which a composer found unnecessary to notate will always remain
for us a foreign language, but eventually we may be able to converse freely with it
as musicians, and so bring a greater range of expression to our interpretations,
rather than merely pursuing some kind of unattainable “authenticity”. (Lawson, 2)

The expansion of modern music styles, genres, and instrument design has led

preferred interpretations in performance to change remarkably through generations of

musicians. It can be argued that interpretive choices are best made with regard to multiple

factors: the player’s own developed musical language and ability, a full understanding of the

written score material, and an intimate knowledge of the performance conventions of the

3 For the purposes of this thesis, “interpretation” can be considered to be deliberate decisions made

with relation to the execution of a piece in performance, as supported by Rink (2009).

2
time and/or culture of the work they are playing. None of these factors are able to be

applied in a vacuum.

Due to Piazzolla’s distinct separation from classical Western performance

conventions, his oeuvre draws interest when discussing interpretation and intent (Drago;

Link; Quiñones; Tsai). The discussion of unwritten stylistic elements in Piazzolla’s

compositions bears consideration for those without previous tango experience. Many of his

works were influenced by traditional tango, which brings its own set of values and

interpretations to unmarked scores that differ greatly to traditional classical interpretations

of the same work.

Piazzolla leaves a legacy of written discussion of his own works. His interviews and

letters contain a wealth of information about his stylistic influences and discussion of

intention in notation, as do recordings of his own ensembles and performances. All of

these are used as primary evidence in relation to the literature’s discussion of his methods.

As Drago writes:

The idiosyncratic and semi-improvised character of his performances, the

continuous revisions to which he subjected his own compositions, the spontaneity
of many of his compositional improvements, all render his performances just as
reliable and inescapable a reference for the scholar as the printed scores of his
compositions with their many arrangements. (28)

As such, any flutist wishing to perform Piazzolla’s music will be assisted in their

task by exploring different areas of knowledge regarding his works. This paper includes a

brief analysis of form and points of interest within Tango Etude no. 3 as a method of

contextualising written information with performance execution, discusses literature

regarding the stylistic idiosyncrasies of tango nuevo, and finishes with a hierarchical analysis

of interpretations recorded by various flutists working both within the tango tradition and

otherwise. The following issues will be discussed not as a single, defined path of “correct

3
interpretation”, but as an open-ended discussion of potential paths that a performer might

take once having assessed the multiple methods of understanding the work.

1: What is the form found in this work, and what are some of the aspects of structure that

can be highlighted in performance?

2: Is there information in the literature that suggests appropriate interpretive practices

within the style or score?

3: How is Tango Etude no. 3 interpreted by different players, and what are the factors that

differentiate their intent and execution?

4
Life and experiences

[Piazzolla]… retained tango’s poignancy and lyricism while rejecting its tendencies
toward sentimentality and bouts of morbid self-pity. He revised its harmonic
language by incorporating the influences of Maurice Ravel, Claude Debussy,
Giacomo Puccini, and Olivier Messiaen, as well as the occasional nod to the cool
jazz of Mulligan and Lennie Tristano. He moved away from the dance floor but
infused the music with a new vitality by using three-part fugues, a walking bass,
jazz-style improvisation, and urgent, brutish accents in echoes of Belá Bartók.
(Gorin, 16)

Piazzolla, born in 1921 in Mar del Plata, Argentina, lived in New York from the age

of three until he returned to Argentina as a teenager. During his early compositional career,

he would struggle to reconcile his experiences between the disparate cultures and their

music. He began to study classical composition, while at the same time playing bandoneon

each night with Troilo’s tango orchestra. He then went on to study with the esteemed

Nadia Boulanger in Paris (Fain; Gorin).

After hearing him play his classical works, Boulanger confessed that she found no

spirit in the pieces and asked what Piazzolla wanted to do with his music. He had not told

her about his life with tango, or his bandoneon playing—an instrument deeply embedded

within the language of tango. After his confession, and a demonstration of one of his tango

works to her she famously told him “Astor, this is beautiful. I like it a lot. Here is the true

Piazzolla—do not ever leave him.” (Gorin 71).

After Nadia’s words, Piazzolla would write tango unashamedly, flavouring the

traditional method with classical forms and America’s jazz idioms until he broke away

entirely to form the controversial tango nuevo. This controversy was in part caused by

introduction of non-tango idioms, harmonic language, forms, and instruments into what

had historically been a major part of Argentine national identity (Link, 2016; Merritt;

Quinones, 2013). Though tango nuevo is also now viewed as a style of dancing, Piazzolla’s

5
music was distinctly intended to be a genre which was not created as an inseparable partner

to dance, as tango had been within its Golden Age4, but as music to listen to alone.

In his writing, he expanded upon formal structures of tango by introducing classical

forms and melodic structures, as well as encouraging more freedom within the

accompaniment in his usage of jazz-based rhythmic and improvisatory techniques (Lucas).

The controversy around his changes to what many considered an important part of their

national identity would reverberate for years to come, with traditionalists protesting his

methods (Gorin; Holten-Andersen; Nielsen). Ultimately, however, his music withstood

those criticisms and now has its credentials firmly established as an expansion of the

traditional tango style.

I made a revolution in tango. I broke the old molds; that’s why they attacked me
and why I had to defend myself, saying at times a word too many. That curse made
me feel bad because if there is something no one could deny, it is my roots: I have
tango stamped around my edges.” (Piazzolla, qtd. in Gorin 39)

Through his life and his work, Piazzolla’s great specialty would be the music of

tango, but flavoured in a new fashion, reflecting the world around him and taking influence

from his fascination with both old and new environments. The function of the classically

trained performer, therefore, is to acknowledge this history in performance and to blend

their understanding of the music with an awareness of the traditions and idiosyncrasies of

the genre of tango nuevo. As a performer, it is possible to consider the facets of a genre and

decide to alter or reject them, but to make this judgement with artistic integrity requires

some level of prior knowledge about appropriate performance conventions.

4 The “Golden Age” is a term denoting the period roughly spanning the mid-1930s to the early

1950s, in which tango’s popularity was at its height.

6
About the tangos

Piazzolla wrote two pieces specifically for flute. First in 1986 was his work Histoire

du Tango, chronicling styles of tango through time; secondly, his six Tango Etudes for solo

flute. First published in 1987, the Tango Etudes were written relatively near the end of

Piazzolla’s life in 1992. By this time, he had premiered and led several different types of

ensemble in which he would play and compose for—his Orquesta tipica (1946); the Buenos

Aires Octet (1955), seen as the “…fault line between traditional and contemporary tango”

(Gorin 250); his first quintet (1960); a nonet entitled Conjunto 9 (1971); an electronic octet

(1971); and his second quintet (1978-1989), an ensemble very dear to his heart (Fain;

Gorin). None of the ensembles he formed or regularly played with incorporated flute,

aside from the octet as an instrument doubled rarely by the saxophonist.

This information notwithstanding, he published both flute works during later years

in his life. No research to date has shed light on this interest. Despite interviews with tango

musicians, trips to Buenos Aires and visits to archives, it remains a matter of speculation.

The closest thing to an answer on the topic is found when Quiñones (2011) writes:

In an interview in 2010, arranger and scholar Marcelo Costas in Buenos Aires

suggested that the flute pieces were written because Piazzolla wanted to carry on
his legacy of tango to other instruments. His supposition was that Piazzolla knew
his health was failing, so he chose flute as one of the instruments to feature his
music, as it is a popular instrument worldwide. (50)

This can be supported with the fact that Piazzolla would later republish the Tango Etudes for

alto saxophone; another instrument which is distinctly “not tango” in its origins.

Musical analysis: Subjectivity and its function

Musical analysis and its relation to performance is an inherently subjective

discussion. Many different performances can be equally valid, but an understanding of

7
genre conventions allow performers to make coherent artistic decisions. We must be aware

that effective performance is often reliant upon a consistent musical interpretation on the

part of the performer. If the listener’s sense of stylistic consistency or a clear interpretive

vision on the part of the performer is lacking, the interpretation may feel poorly

communicated, insincere, or emotionless. Leech-Wilkinson writes regarding this:

I’ve said that performance style is a collection of habits. What do these habits
consist of? Quite simply, they consist of ways of not performing scores literally. A
literal sounding… of the pitches and durations of a score is perceived as
mechanical and ‘unmusical’. To say that a performance is “musical” in effect means
that aspects of what is notated are performed non-literally, with some variation
from the notated value which brings a sense of beauty or a feeling of
communicated meaning to a performance of the score. (256)

Piazzolla’s attitude toward score reproduction was similar, if perhaps slightly more

laissez-faire—his arrangements of his works differ greatly from performance to

performance, as does his ornamentation of the written score. The skeleton of the work

remains the same, with accented pitches generally functioning as an outline of potential

rhythmic or melodic improvisations.

Initially, an understanding of the overall form and structure is vital to beginning the

interpretation of works; perhaps more so in a work performed by a single line instrument,

as interpretations of the music’s harmonic skeleton must be emphasised without recourse

to overt harmonic changes.

Next comes the knowledge contained in the literary discussion of tango nuevo and

Piazzolla’s interpretive choices in performance, as well as information from his discussions

and interviews. We are immediately presented with an issue – Piazzolla played bandoneon

masterfully, but he did not play flute. There are no performances extant that carry the

express approval or participation of the composer-performer, as we have with many of his

other works.

8
 Claudio Barile, Argentine flutist, presents another viewpoint on this, remarking

We flute players are lucky to have music originally written by Piazzolla. I

mention this because nowadays everybody plays Piazzolla, more than ever…
Musicians play mostly arrangements of arrangements of those he made of his own
music. And when these arrangements are “enriched” by others, the orchestration
becomes absolutely random. (2009)

Tango tradition often encourages different instrumental arrangements of works,

with the fundamental style of playing preserved or altered by idiomatic execution of the

score (Fain; Possetti). Despite this, Barile affirms that with each re-orchestration or

instrumentation of a work, the intention of Piazzolla’s composition is lessened somewhat.

Piazzolla writes in the preface to his Tango Etudes: “It is advisable that the

performer should well exaggerate the accents and respirations, therefore inspiring the way

in which tangos are played on the bandoneon.” (Piazzolla, 1987). With this we have one

explicit link to the performance practice of the composer himself – the idiosyncratic sound

of his instrument. Piazzolla would declare later “I play with violence; my bandoneon must

sing and scream. I can’t conceive of pastel tones in tango.” (Gorin 144). Drago further

supports this approach to many of Piazzolla’s compositions, writing “We can be certain

that the bandoneon as a sonority is structural to Piazzolla’s music, both to his performance

style and to his aesthetic and music writing.” (32). The bandoneon as an instrument is

fundamental to traditional tango, representative as a symbol and a sound unique to the

genre. To understand the instrument, as well as the method of creating tango-specific

ornamentation, is the first step to a greater understanding of how to replicate those

qualities.

There are, of course, no recordings by the composer of Piazzolla’s flute pieces.

Thus, as a corollary to the information given from score analysis, a discussion of variations

within different recordings released by experts in the field of flute performance may assist

9
players in considering interpretive practice in their own playing, in conjunction with

information gathered from discussion of specific tango and tango nuevo idioms. Martino (ed.

Brunelli) refers to this cross-cultural discussion:

These works provide us with an exciting opportunity: to compare the phrasing and
the mode to make the interpretations shared between Argentine and European flutists. There
is “something” created by Piazzolla that Argentines do not find a foreign language. This
small regional trait has been used by the performer-composer-director Astor to influence
the subtle details. And it is in the tiny fringes – impossible to notate – that the most
personal gestures of the art of tango reside.5

Piazzolla remarks on this concept of subtle detail and gesture in a personal email to

violinist Fernando Suárez Paz:

[Piazzolla] called me from San Francisco asking me to urgently travel [to the US]
because the people of Kronos didn't know how to play. I told him that that was
impossible, that they are one of the best quartets in the world. He insisted so much
that I just had to travel. As you should have already figured out, what they did not
know were the [special] effects, the tango swing, and that is something that nobody
knows how to do unless he was born here [in Buenos Aires]. (143)6

A combination of this knowledge and discussion of the “special effects” of tango

as applicable to Tango Etude no. 3 may assist the performer in determining what

interpretative points would be musically significant in their own performance, and allow

them to incorporate them. As acknowledged by Cook:

…consideration of the performative effects and social consumption of recordings

provides a context within which to make sense of observations resulting from close
listening or computational evaluation. In short, cultural analysis can be supported

5 “Estas obras nos brindan una interesantísima oportunidad: poder comparar el fraseo y el modo de
hacer de la interpretacíon entre los flautistas argentinos y los europeos. Hay “algo” de Piazzolla entre los
argentinos que no encontramos el el discurso extranjero. Esta pequeñísima franja de rasgo regional ha sido
explotada por el Astor intérprete-compositor-director hasta los más sutiles detalles. Y en esta pequeñísima
franja – imposible de graficar – donde reside el gesto más personal del arte del tango.” Trans. Lagerlow, 2016.

6 Al siguiente dia de regresar de una gira por Europa, que eran muy cansadoras, me llama desde
S.Francisco pidiendome que viaje urgente porque los del Kronos no sabian tocar, yo le dije que era imposible,
que era uno de los mejores cuartetos del mundo, insistio tanto que tuve que viajar, ya te imaginas lo que ellos
no sabian, eran los efectos y el swing tanguero, que eso no lo sabe hacer nadie si no nacio aca. Trans. Drago,
2008.

10
 by empirical analysis, and empirical analysis given purpose by cultural analysis. It’s a
win-win relationship. (2009, 245)

The recordings used within this study, due to their nature as non-live, edited

performances, can be argued to be the closest thing to the musician’s ideal “model” of the

piece – representing their concept of the music as it exists within their minds in “a perfect

soundworld” to some extent more accurately and with more finesse than a live

performance (2009). As Lawson writes, “…the possibilities of recording fundamentally

changed the character of music-making” (ed. Rink, 2002).

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Analysis of music

Musical analysis has historically been a multifaceted issue, with many scholarly

attempts made to quantify and qualify aspects of musicianship, theory, form and structure

through the years. The most basic forms of discussion deal with the score alone;

engagement with “authenticity”; the psychology or physicality of performance; and the

sounds created by the act thereof. The function of deeper analysis in this paper primarily

relates to the audio analysis of performance and the literature regarding interpretive

practice, with a brief contextualisation of score-based information.

Few scholarly works achieve the breadth of concept required to condense separate

areas of analysis into one overarching theme without diluting the supplied information.

Though all methods may overlap in some areas, the questions they raise are varied in

function, and each method in absentia leaves questions that require recourse to other

methods of discussion – a veritable ouroboros of analytics. Cook acknowledges the

drawbacks of all discussed forms of analysis, and sets some conditions on what could be

11
considered a “successful” analysis; namely, that it “…should not aim to be a carbon-copy

of the listener’s experience: rather it should simplify, clarify, and illuminate it” (229). This

paper aims to simplify the performer’s experience with tango idioms by using the Tango

Etude no. 3 as a focal point for practical discussion, thus simplifying abstraction into

performance data.

Cook’s aptly named Guide to Musical Analysis (1987) is a major work regarding the

layman’s approach to different aspects of analysis. It covers in detail several forms of

analysis, categories and methods of discussion that influence these forms, and also

discusses the researcher’s function and the differences between “…the logical structure of

music on the one hand and its expression in sound on the other” (121). Rink (2002) brings

another viewpoint to this sentiment, writing “performers are continually engaged in a

process of “analysis”, only of a kind different to that employed in published analyses. This

sort of “analysis” is not some independent procedure applied to the act of interpretation,

but rather an integral part of the performing process” (36)7.

Cook’s later collaborative work (ed. 2009) outlines potential approaches to the

method of quantifying different categories of musical information, but is limited by the

unquantifiable nature of abstract concepts (e.g. emotions) experienced by the listener;

moments of emotion can, however, be examined by a usage of his methodologies for

different factors of the music combined with an understanding of when these points occur.

A particularly moving moment, for example, may be initiated by three or four separate

musical concepts coming together; the conjunction of rubato, altered dynamic and vibrato

is a particularly common example of one method of attaining this. An analysis of emotion

7 The argument can be made that this thesis functions as a bridging point between the performer’s

disparate experiences and the need for unification thereof. Rink argues that players are constantly analysing
by virtue of performing, but that there is seemingly a gap between the experience of performance self-analysis
and “published analyses”.

12
with regards to different methods of execution in violinists is explored further by De Poli,

Rodá and Vidolin using visualisations of audio information.

Hill (ed. Rink) brings nuance to the discussion from a performer’s point of view,

encouraging the reader to review and justify the methods by which they learn new pieces.

He finishes by reminding the reader that “literal-mindedness” in the case of score

interpretation is often painfully unmusical in intended execution. Dolan (2013) also

discusses the way in which “spontaneous” music making, or improvisation within a

framework can create a “more intuitive attitude” (32), mentioning that listeners studied had

a higher level of engagement with improvised performances than those who listened to

stricter forms of the same works; a topic very relevant to tango tradition.

In his work Reading Musical Interpretation (2009), Hellaby outlines major categories to

be used for the purposes of a formalised, empirical interpretive discussion and/or analysis

of performance, building upon the works of Clarke; Schmalfeldt; Repp; Todd; Seeger; et al.

The designated categories arrived at are similar to those discussed in Liebman (2012) and

Palmer (2015), but are segmented into separate concepts and grouped within hierarchical

levels ranging from the “executive” and comparatively objective functions of score

interpretation, to the more specific “ideals”, functioning as an expression of the

performer’s intent. This defined method of discussion with relation to recorded

performance was used to identify and compare data points between performances of the

Tango Etude no. 3 in the final section of Chapter 4.

Tango

“…It is crucial to understand the language of tango, its styles and the widest palette of
resources possible in order to assimilate tango. This need… doesn’t necessarily have to
turn into an archaeological process. Each musician and each new composer must re-read
the different components of this music in depth, and, with these at hand, search for new
possibilities, new materials, which will result in the continued enrichment of the genre.”
(Possetti, 9)

13
 The performance methods of tango music, primarily transferred orally, are only just

now being catalogued and identified clearly for non-Argentine performers and English

speakers. The difficulty of performing tango without a clear method of interpretation is

obvious—the methods available revolved primarily around close listening of established

artists, ensembles, or recordings. This method, though it is sufficient, is perhaps not the

most efficient manner of learning alone. There are several online resources available for

perusal of scores, recordings and historical information; cybertango.com and

todotango.com are excellent starting points, with multiple languages available and new

information consistently collected.

More practical method books for the aspiring musician are collated in their most

complete form by the Tango Sin Fin organisation under the Método de Tango series, featuring

published works focusing on the roles of individual instruments and methods of execution

of tango idioms, with audio examples and accompaniment tracks to assist.

Several works provide points of discussion for traditionalist tango styles (Merritt,

Viladrich). However, the function of the traditional tango was closely coupled with its use

in dance, and many works about tango spend a significant portion of time on that topic.

Merritt’s work is notable in part due to its extensive discussion of tango as a reflection of

Argentine society and culture, framing it within constructs of gender and sexuality in her

discussion of the dance form, with Link (2013; 2016) and Quinones (2013) also reflecting

deeply on tango’s cultural development to contextualise their research.

Piazzolla’s life, works, and tango nuevo

Piazzolla’s personal life has been researched deeply, with two works published as

biographies. The foremost works written chronicling his life and experiences could be said

14
to be Le Grand Tango: The Life and Music of Astor Piazzolla, by Azzi and Collier (2000), and

Astor Piazzolla: A Memoir by Natalio Gorin (2001).

The appropriately named Tango! The Dance, the Song, the Story by Collier, Cooper,

Martin and Azzi (1995) traces the tango through time, with separate authors dealing with

clearly delineated points in its history. In this book Piazzolla’s work is given context within

the greater scope of tango history, including a discussion on the concept of tango nuevo and

its separation from tango as a genre.

Many of the articles relating specifically to analysis of Piazzolla’s compositional

output have been collated in Brunelli’s Estudios sobre la obra de Astor Piazzolla, or “Studies on

the Work of Astor Piazzolla” published 2008. The work opens with a discussion by Kuri on

Piazzolla’s difficult in blending two disparate parts of his life into his music. Mauriño also

discusses the influences of various tango figures on Piazzolla’s compositional and

performance output, with regard to both the techniques used by others that were adapted

into his own work and the players who would become part of his ensembles and shape

them from within. They deal in turn with points such as performance practices within

ensembles (Kutnowski; Kuss) and analysis of selected pieces (Atlas; Brunelli; Pelinski;

Krämer) often from the perspective of one already participating in the tango tradition.

Other discussions published elsewhere deal with separate works of his in terms of

structural analysis, performance practice and historical context, with reference to musicians

who have not necessarily experienced tango previously (Holten-Andersen; Drago; Koh;

Link; Molazadeh; Tsai). Quinones (2013) discusses the framing of authenticity with regard

to the Tango Etudes and approaching tango from an outsider’s perspective, with invaluable

insight into history and performance techniques discussed within this paper.

Tsai (2005) also discusses the aspects of tango nuevo as a disparate concept, using a

score analysis of Piazzolla’s work, Flora’s Game. Link’s work in the field stands out, with her

15
2009 paper providing an in-depth analysis of Piazzolla’s performance practices in his

second quintet, a 2013 thesis paper examining her own performance practise of other

tangueros8, and finally a 2016 book that contextualises the above in a larger framework. Koh

discusses both the history of traditional tango and some of the compositional aspects taken

from jazz found in Piazzolla’s music, using a comparative score analysis of the famous

traditional tango La Cumparasita with several of Piazzolla’s works to discuss differences.

Alejandro Drago’s 2008 paper Instrumental Tango Idioms in the Symphonic Works and

Orchestral Arrangements of Astor Piazzolla: Performance and Notational Problems; A Conductor’s

Perspective is a major dissertation that addresses some of the unique aspects of Piazzolla’s

notational conventions as translated to performance practice. He discusses several points

of interest with relation to this study, in a comprehensive, clear manner; however, his

dissertation primarily deals with string and piano instruments. The function of the work

revolves around the conductor’s challenge of how to best incorporate idiomatic tango

playing into classical musicianship.

8 Experienced players operating within and understanding tango tradition.

16
Chapter 3: Methodology

Musical analysis with relation to performance can be divided neatly into two

primary categories, as set down by Rink (2002). The first is analysis of the intention of a

performance. The second is analysis of a performance after the fact. Rink writes that the

first method is “…whether rigorous or more pragmatic in nature, is potentially prescriptive

with regard to performance, whereas the second type of analysis is descriptive.” The warning

he gives is with relation to the first; that a performer is aware that a systemic attempt to

convey all the information found in formal analysis could “…lead to ludicrous

results…however valuable a knowledge of the processes and relationships implicit in that

analysis might be in building the interpretation” (39).

This paper’s function fits within the first defined area of study–analysis of several

different factors that provides information which can be then used as a preliminary

approach to stylistic decision-making–but also incorporates a more detailed form of

analysis in including retrospective analysis of audio recordings done by others. This is used

to identify commonalities and provide discussion points with relation to relevant literature,

in the hope that listeners can determine whether particular interpretive choices highlighted

within this work are of interest to their own method of execution. Readers can consider the

table below (Fig. 1) as a broad overview of the steps of analysis throughout this work.

17
 Figure 1. Types of analysis and progression.

The etude chosen for inclusion within this study was Tango Etude no. 3: Molto marcato

e energico, as it provides material for a discussion of contrasts in execution and style from a

performer’s standpoint. Its function as an etude is made clear through the technical

demands Piazzolla makes on the player in speed of execution, fast articulated passages in

the bottom register, and slurred large intervallic changes. The work provides both

opportunities for virtuosic technical playing, as well as semi-improvisatory melody lines

over slower phrases. It contains simple musical material, with clear form and recurring

melodic and rhythmic concepts that are made explicit to both performer and listener. The

limitation of using a single work for study is clear; however, the scope of this paper does

18
not allow for meaningful discussion of more than this without diluting or condensing

separate branches of analysis.

The function of analysis should firstly assist in identifying points of interest within

the score. In this work, one of the sources of data used was an analysis of the form and

harmonic structure of the work (Liebman; Poli), as well as a discussion of the recurring

rhythmic figures found in this work and other compositions of Piazzolla’s. The form and

harmonic analysis uses the chords as written in the accompanied publication, and places

the accented notes as written within each bar to identify the music’s harmonic skeleton.

Given the limitations of this thesis, this analysis was intended primarily to contextualise

later findings.

Data collection

The initial task was to find a range of recordings from notable artists with

professionally recorded studio interpretations of Tango Etude no. 3. Candidates chosen for

analysis included a balance of Argentine and non-Argentine players operating in different

areas of the world, all of whom are recognised in the field of solo flute performance. Of

the information collected, not all potential candidates were included in the discussion due

to the limitations of this thesis.

Candidates analysed include Claudio Barile, Argentine principal flute of the Buenos

Aires Philharmonic since 1984; Cecile Daroux, a student of Rampal and esteemed soloist

with a Masters in 20th century music; Paulina Fain, Argentine author of The Flute in Tango

(2012) and tango lecturer around the world; Patrick Gallois, another student of Rampal and

renowned soloist in his own right; Eugenia Moliner, one half of the Cavatina Duo, a

guitar/flute partnership who are currently artists in residence at Roosevelt University,

Chicago; and Irmgard Toepper, principal piccolo of the Kassel State Theater Orchestra.

19
 The process of close listening was used to obtain information about each

recording9. Individual scores were marked and annotated with symbols assisting the

representation of information from each performer (Liebman) with the originally published

1987 Henry Lemoine score used as an urtext. The marked scores and coded data were

discussed with reference to Hellaby’s proposed framework and with relation to the

attributes of tango discussed previously. All performances were then cross-referenced to

find commonalities and disparities in interpretation.

The intended function of this recording analysis follows Cook’s recommendations

(2009) by functioning as an aid to the performer in identifying specific characteristics

within a subset of the musical information available in order to “…allow a great deal of

interaction between the aural experience on one hand and the analytical rationalization [sic]

on the other” (231).

9 Programs used included Audacity and Transcribe!

20
Coding

Hellaby’s categories consist of:

1. Era (Style)

2. Authorship (Score)

3. Genre

4. Topic (a type associated with the function of the music)

5. Topical Mode (performance qualifiers that do not specify tempo, but rather

“appeal to the imagination… or the emotions”) (38)

6. Characteriser (unique contextual devices that create interest)

7. Tempo

8. Duration Manipulator (rubato)

9. Sonic Moderator (dynamics predominantly, but also the individual method

by which a performer might execute the individual notes in a passage—a

“certain kind of sound” (46).)

Though not all of the categories discussed may be initially apparent, they all serve a

level of function within the performer’s intended interpretation. Hellaby proposes an

analytical framework in which the categories are qualified by their level of engagement with

the performer, using a sliding scale between score-focused concepts or attributes of

execution in performance chosen by the player. Although Hellaby refers to the categories

as moving from the “ideal” to the “executive” from top to bottom, the concept of the

score’s execution as “ideal” is a heavily problematised matter. It could be better thought of

as “informative”, providing data for execution.

21
 This method employed as a form of discussion provides a division of categories

that satisfy most aspects of performance practice, which can then be used to initiate

discussion of points of interest. All findings follow and cross-reference aspects of Hellaby’s

proposed framework via synthesis of ideas. He also provides a unification of concept by

providing smaller subgroups to assist discussion. Each group informs the latter groups,

with decisions made at any lower level influencing decisions made above.

Group 1, Era and Authorship, focuses on aspects of music making that are

subjective in their interpretation; the “ideal” that Hellaby refers to is that of the composer’s

intent, and the function of data within this group is primarily to observe aspects of

performance that are referred to by literature as belonging to the tango and tango nuevo style,

as well as referring to the written information which conveys the fundamental information

of any given work.

Group 2 refers to the Genre (in this case, specifically tango nuevo, with a sub-genre

of “etude” and Topic of the piece (not relevant to the work studied here).

Group 3, Topical mode and Characterisers, relies on the broader setting of

genre as discussed in Group 2. It focuses on the specific qualities that affect emotional

impact and reference the genre of the work.

Group 4 contains Tempo, Duration Manipulator, and Sonic Moderator. It

deals with aspects that are primarily discussed with reference to quantitative analysis of

recording data, and that are a direct action of the performer.

22
Chapter 4: Findings and Discussion

Form and structure

These six works are most often performed in their original context as solo etudes;

however, a year after they were published, Piazzolla’s publishing company wrote to him to

ask for a harmonised version. Piazzolla sent a manuscript one year later with the note

"Dear friend, finished the piano part of the Etudes tanguistiques for saxo alto and piano...

Good luck to Mr Delangle and please tell him to forgive my music handwriting. I was in a

hurry and could not do it better..."10

The manuscript was so difficult to decipher that the planned 1989 republication of

the works for saxophone with piano included went forward as a publication for solo

saxophone only. Indeed, Piazzolla would pass away more than a decade before their initial

publication in 2003. The existence of this harmony does make the discussion of implied

harmony lines easier on the part of the player. The performer then has the option, even if

performing alone, to create phrases that follow the implicit harmony. Appendix A: Tango

etudes and harmonic skeletonsFigure 5 shows the harmonic structure and skeleton of Tango

Etude no. 3.

The initial tempo given is crotchet = 138, with the direction of molto marcato e

energico. This etude, in A minor, is in a modified ternary form of ABCA; the A section runs

from bar 1 to 39 and then recurs from bar 61 to the end. Section A consists of an initial

eight bar phrase which sets up a characteristic rhythmic line found in many of Piazzolla’s

works—the 3-3-2 pattern which then recurs frequently through the entire piece, always

notated with accent. This rhythm was found in few works within the Golden Age of tango,

Taken from the notes for the Henry Lemoine edition of Piazzolla’s Tango Etudes.
10

<https://www.henry-lemoine.com/fr/catalogue/fiche/27733>

23
and has come to be associated most prominently with Piazzolla’s works as a modified

version of the milonga tango rhythm, also influenced by the Klezmer music heard by

Piazzolla during his time in New York (Drago; Lavocah; Link; Maurino et al).

Ex. 1. Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). Opening rhythmic motif, bar 1.

This rhythmic figure (Ex. 1) becomes an ostinato, with non-accented notes

descending chromatically. The second half of A uses similar melodic material, now

featuring fermatas and more rhythmic complexity. A downwards chromatic glissando

replaces the original movement of E-A-C, with a written acciaccatura leading the ear back

to A minor upon release.

Ex. 2. Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). Secondary A motif, bar 16.

Piazzolla writes the first strong cadential point at bar 31 and repeats it once more at

39, with a decisive line of repeated semiquavers leading the listener to the highest point

encountered thus far. The sensation of “falling” established in the first phrase could be said

to be one of the major motifs in the work, with lines in the A and B sections beginning at

their highest point and descending chromatically or diatonically towards the next marked

chord. One method of outlining this in performance is to crescendo throughout the

24
subphrases, providing a sense of movement and energy toward each point of interest rather

than creating smaller phrase outlines.

The B section introduces new melodic material, with a reaffirmation of the previous
rhythmic line.

Ex. 3. Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). B section, bars 40-42.

This section repeats the same underlying harmonic line (Ex. 5) four times as the

melody develops, with the “falling” motion coming back once again as the line becomes

more rhythmically complex.

Ex. 4. Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). B section repeated harmonic outline, bars 32-35.

The first extension of a phrase and deviation from the established 3-3-2 rhythmic

ostinato is shown with the use of a 3/3/3/2/2/2 line as a transition into C (Ex. 5), building

rhythmic tension and interest before releasing it entirely in what becomes a melodic,

“singing” contrast.

25
Ex. 5. Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). Phrase extension and change of rhythmic ostinato, bars 47-
48.

The C section of the work is marked meno mosso e piu cantabile. At 12 bars in length, it

is noticeably shorter than the other sections of the piece, but also provides a contrast to the

expectations already set up in earlier melodic material. The line of each bar is shaped

upwards, in contrast to the rest of the work, (Ex. 6) while the harmonic movement

continues to move down diatonically.

Ex. 6, Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). Harmonic skeleton of C.

The melodic material used is in a 6-bar phrase, repeated with a direction to the

performer of “ad lib.”. Many different interpretations are possible with regards to this

section, with its notation suggesting several methods of score alteration possible to the

experienced tango player (Fain, Link, Possetti). During the repetition, the melodic skeleton

is for the most part unchanged, but Piazzolla writes with more complex rhythms and

additional grace notes.

26
Ex. 7, Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). Bars 49-50; beginning bars of C.

Ex. 8, Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). Bars 55-56; repetition of initial melodic material with more
complexity.

The treatment which this melodic line is given upon repetition suggests that

Piazzolla’s intention is to diversify the melodic material with written embellishments similar

to those applied by performers within the tango and tango nuevo traditions. Performers

should consider this in their practice and make decisions about the level of embellishment

that they believe to be appropriate. This issue is discussed further in the next segment of

this thesis.

The final bar of C, marked accelerando, brings the listener back to the recapitulation

of the A section and the revival of the dance-like rapid shifting, with a crescendo marked to

the ending repetition of A/E in rising semiquavers. Whether Piazzolla intends the

recapitulation to be identical in execution to the beginning is unknown; however, to

maintain interest to the ear, intensification or alteration of similar performance attributes as

played in the opening section could be appropriate.

27
Potential interpretive practices of tango idioms

Fain (2009) writes:

… In the language of tango there are certain elements that are almost always
interpreted in one way, and others that we are free to change quite spontaneously
from one day to the next. (9)

The following section gives a brief overview of selective tango performance

practices potentially appropriate for usage within the Tango Etude no. 3 and their possible
execution in practice by flutists. Exhaustive discussion of ornamentation of many kinds
with regards to notation and performance practices for other instruments can be found in
Drago (2008), Link (2009) or the Método de Tango series, with both Fain (2012) and
Quinones (2013) also offering an audio compendium of tango-specific gestures.

Arrastre

A common idiom identified throughout many different types of tango and heard in

numerous recordings is that of the arrastre; a movement increasing in intensity, whether it

be through timbre, pitch and/or volume, that provides emphasis to the arrival upon the

dominant beat by functioning as a noticeable movement from weak to strong (Possetti,

Link). The arrastre is dependent in execution on the instrument on which it is played. Both

keyed and unkeyed arrastres are common in flute playing (Fain). Piano arrastres are most

commonly seen as a chromatic semiquaver run of 4 notes, always without rubato, arriving

on the next beat on the desired pitch. This is often useful with regards to setting tempo

(Possetti). With regard to the function of a bandoneon (Drago; Fain; Lavocah), it is

produced by pressing the desired key before opening the instrument and then accelerating

the opening to a sudden stop; a similar function can be achieved in the flute by beginning

the note with low air pressure and unfocused embouchure and quickly increasing pressure

and focus before abruptly cutting off the air in whatever manner the player decides. There

28
are two potential methods by which this can be achieved; firstly, simply by arresting the

motion of the air via an application of the abdominal muscles and/or a closing of the

throat, or to replace the tongue at the top of the mouth without ceasing pressure, creating

an almost percussive effect as the air’s motion through the embouchure is ceased suddenly.

The most easily identified possibility for an arrastre is at the very beginning of the

work. A keyed arrastre establishes speed more clearly than an unkeyed arrastre, which

provides one possibility for assisting the listener’s sense of established tempo; however, an

unkeyed arrastre is also a possibility if desired. The recapitulation of A does not provide an

opportunity for an arrastre.

Articulation

As mentioned earlier, Piazzolla instructs the flutist to play in the style of a

bandoneon; a phenomenon Drago describes as “inter-idiomatic borrowing” (59).

In allegro tempi, on strong beats and/or accented notes, the attack in all tango
instruments… tends to be harder and more edgy than would be considered
standard for classical playing on the same instruments… in tango, a certain degree
of harshness or roughness in the attack is expected, and it is surely regarded as a
part of the acoustic model of this kind of attack. (60)

The desired quality of the accent (>) is generally associated when playing flute with

a strong push of the abdominal muscles, with focused tone unless the arrastre is desired.

The air is immediately present and the note is of its full length. Exercises similar to those of

vibrato studies can be used as an acoustic model, but with care to ensure that, unlike vibrato,

the pressure is not relaxed so far that the note’s pitch drops below the notated pitch.

Notably, on longer notes, the “push” is not sustained fully; each note will decay into

nothingness, unlike traditional acoustic models of the French method classical flutist. If the

note is to be sustained, both > and _ will be present to indicate tenuto playing.

29
 Players may choose to use alternative syllables to vocalise more intensely the attack

of a note in whatever manner they desire, rather than the traditional tonguing methods of

“t/k/d/g”. Possible beginnings may be “sha”, “cha”, “thp”, etc, all of which create different

movements of air and can be used in conjunction with air attack or release for different

sonorities (Clarke, Dick, Fain). This syllabic air effect is also used as a substitution in flute

music for a common form of percussive accompaniment; the tambor (drum) effect. The

other function of percussion, performed by violins within tango, is known as lija or

chicharra—“sandpaper/cicada”. The bow is used with an alternate grip to produce a

scratching sound, generally of a more complex rhythm than the tambor (Drago).11

Worthy of consideration in this instance is the combination of articulation and

dynamics in another context; the motion Drago refers to as “inward-outward” when

applied to a pair of notes, or that Fain titles “semi-slurred” (64). Drago describes it with

relation to a string instrument as “The first note is attacked normally, then it is slurred,

without a break or interruption, to the second note. When this second note is reached, the

bow leaves the string, optionally with a slight slap of the wrist, as if yanking out a thread”

(66). The spirit of this instruction is easily conveyed to the flute if one considers the

column of air and the abdominal muscles associated with pressure as the bow and hand;

syllabically conveyed in articulation as similar to “TU-ru/TU-da”, with an immediate

release of pressure when reaching the second, staccato note of each pair. This articulation

can be used in a two-slurred pattern to modify an already heard phrase, create rhythmic

interest or tension, or to make accentuation more audible.

Modified articulations within the context of Tango Etude no. 3 have myriad

possibilities in application; whether the performer decides to consistently apply certain

11 Examples of the lija or chicarra as well as the tambor can be heard readily in many performances of

Piazzolla’s, such as his Primavera Porteña during the opening melody.

30
aspects of articulation or to modify the A section when it returns near the end is left to

their discretion.

Ex. 9. Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987), bar 26-27. Demonstration of paired notes in which the
“inward-outward” or “semi-slurred” motion could be appropriate in execution.

Improvisation

Kutnowski writes on rubato within Piazzolla’s work;

How was that such transformations still belonged to the tango? It was because most of
New Tango rhythmic innovations were rooted in, or simply copied, from the kinds of
rhythmic irregularities present in any 'authentic' vocal performance. (108)

The individuality of rubato and improvisatory figures in any of Piazzolla’s recording

of the composer’s own work is sometimes breathtaking, almost creating a cadenza of any

given arrangement (Gorin). Appendix B shows Fain’s transcription of Piazzolla’s written

score juxtaposed with one of his many performances of his work Adios Nonino, for

consideration on this topic.

Within Tango Etude no. 3, the most potential for improvisation lies within the C

section, which is part of the groups of “expressive melody” as discussed by Fain, Link and

Possetti, and thus appropriate for melodic ornamentation of many different kinds, unlike

the “rhythmic melody” of the A and B sections. Piazzolla’s direction of ad lib. in the latter

half of the C section has similar connotations.

31
 When improvising within the tango language, many options are available; the most

basic of which is the use of rubato. Of course, rubato is generally present in many styles of

music; one can hardly consider it a tango specific concept. However, the extent to which

rubato is used by tango singers and players in a solo line often displaces the melody entirely

from the bars, treating the phrase or a verse as something which can be stretched until

soloist and accompaniment are in different bars entirely, before rushing forward to meet

again at the phrase’s end12. This method can be used in a larger phrase or within single bars

to create rhythmic and melodic tension, especially with repetitive melodic lines.

If playing within a band in a soli section, the rhythm may be modified to stay within

the beats but add rhythmic interest; for example, in an expressive melody, players may

change four written quavers to two crotchet triplet notes and two quaver triplet notes, to

ensure that the strong beats of the bar are maintained in unison and that the soli line

continues together (Fain; Link).

With regards to the A and B sections, smaller modifications can be made, but the

primary function of rhythm alteration should be with respect to the melody. Any

alterations that occur are primarily to highlight the melodic line. Requena reflects, in an

interview especially with regards to tango arranging “What is arranging?... It is not difficult

to define. It is highlighting the melody and making it more beautiful without destroying

it—on the contrary, always trying to respect it above all other things” (Todotango).13

Possetti lists the common ornamentation of the broader tango language thus:

“Superior, inferior and multiple appoggiatura; Mordent; Minor second; Double non-

12 http://www.todotango.com/english/music/song/206/Naranjo-en-flor/ provides a lovely

example of this effect with the recording of iconic bandleader Anibal Troilo’s orquesta tipica and Floreal Ruiz
as singer.
13«¿Qué es el arreglo? Mirá, cada uno tiene su concepción al respecto, pero no es difícil definirlo. Es

tratar de hermosear y destacar la melodía, sin destruirla, al contrario, tratando siempre de respetarla al
máximo. Trans. Lagerlow.

32
stepwise appoggiatura; Octave; Gruppetto (turn); Repetition; Glissando; Arpeggio” (200).

Piazzolla favoured the gruppetto, mordent, or acciaccaturas when moving between larger

jumps. Filling in the space inside larger intervals with a slurred chromatic or diatonic

sequence was also a regular feature of his performances in solo sections, as well as escape

tones in downward sequences (Fain; Drago). One important consideration is that his

performances also often include an appoggiatura note directly before the presence of the

gruppetto (eg. b. 2, 5, 10 in Appendix B).

One example of a potentially appropriate addendum to the etude’s C section is

Piazzolla’s “stammering” trill, in which he would repeatedly attack a note written as a single

pitch of longer duration when playing a solo line. Execution of this method of

ornamentation would regularly follow the motion of a directed accelerando, ritardando or a

combination of both, depending on the context (Drago, Possetti). The regularly occurring

C6 found within that section have many opportunities for embellishment. Another

imitative possibility could be an appoggiatura and/or gruppetto between the first and

second notes of the bars, given the large interval movement. A glissandic sequence could

also be used. The level and function of improvisation within performance should be

considered by the performer during the preparation of this work; listening to Piazzolla’s

works and experimenting with their own melodic embellishments, large or small, is highly

recommended.

Practical execution of the work as demonstrated by recordings

As set out in Chapter 2, the aspects of performance discussed will be with reference

to Hellaby’s Reading Musical Interpretation primarily, with discussion of identified interpretive

practices. They are, as grouped in regard to discussion within this work:

33
 Group 1: Era, Authorship

Group 2: Genre

Group 3: Characteriser

Group 4: Tempo, Duration Manipulator (rubato), Sonic Moderator (dynamics)

Claudio Barile

Group 1: Stylistic conventions of the era are incorporated with regards to

articulation and phrasing. Score is followed accurately for the most part, with minor

adaptations of notated rhythm and inclusion of unmarked pauses/separations of phrases in

all sections of the work. Written pitches remain unchanged.

Group 2: Genre is clear. Intended qualities of the work (marcato e energico) are

conveyed via Barile’s usage of accelerando at points of interest within the phrase and

accentuation, with the “etude” aspects apparent in the high level of clarity and speed of

execution.

Group 3: Paired quavers throughout are regularly played with strong accentuation

and an extension of the first note of each pair in performance. Semiquaver runs during the

same section (eg. bars 8, 15, 28-31) are often played unevenly, rushing toward the final note

and pausing before the next bar begins. Barile uses an arrastre-like motion in held notes

(ex. bar 18, 20, 22) using air and embouchure shape to achieve tone colour effects.

Performance qualifiers and written pitches are followed as listed within the score

during the C section. No alterations are made to the melodic line in either the first C

section or the ad lib. phrase, though rubato is prominently used. The repetition of the A

section does not differ in methods of execution of characterisers from the beginning of

the work.

34
 Group 4: Tempo is consistent throughout A when viewed bar to bar, with

considerable usage of duration manipulation highlighting internal phrases within bars.

Consistent tempo sustained over measures at A is 136 beats per minute (BPM), with the B

section sustaining a prolonged accelerando from 115 BPM at the beginning of the sections to

128 in the final bars before the C section. Noticeable accentuation and forte lines that effect

a change in the timbre are made when written in the score, with dark and intense tone

colours in the lower register. Written crescendos are prominent in execution, and the C

section features usage of “echo”-like dynamic execution in the ad lib. repetition of the

melodic material. The repeat of the A section is marginally faster than the opening, with an

accelerando into the final eight bars.

Cecile Daroux

Group 1: Daroux convincingly executes stylistic conventions with regards to the

era, with clear involvement of tango idioms. The score is followed accurately with regards

to accented pitches, with genre-appropriate idioms also present in all sections.

Group 2: The genre of etude is apparent, with the speed of performance

substantially faster than marked, creating technical challenges. Intended qualities of the

work are observed with regard to accentuation and speed. Marcato accentuation is quite

noticeable, creating altered tone colour.

Group 3: Several different tango-related characterisers appear. A multi-note

chromatic arrastre is used in the beginning. The B section appears as written. Daroux plays

freely at C, with rubato and glissando usage in the first section, and additional glissando

ornamentation with more prominent rubato in the ad lib. section. Accentuation is raw and

bold, creating multiphonics through strong, focused air.

35
 Extended techniques are used to create alternate articulations in the repetition of

the A section. Fermatas are also held for longer, with alternative shaping of the mouth

(“sha”, “cha”) to create a different tone colour and altered pitch upon exiting the held note.

Group 4: Tempo fluctuates internally through use of rubato, with the initial A

phrase staying between 156-160 BPM and relaxing later into 148 BPM during the B

section. There is more extreme usage of duration manipulation within the C section, with

tempo changing drastically. Dynamics are used within the upper ranges of capability, with

tone colour reflecting that intensity to the point of notes occasionally breaking into the

upper register.

Paulina Fain

Group 1: Authorship is of interest within this interpretation of the work, as Fain

plays an arrangement of the work for two flutes edited by herself and Exequiel Mantega

with flutist Patricia De Dalt. The score remains generally intact as published in its original

form, with the primary solo part being played by both in turn. Tempo marking as published

in the original score is not written; nor is the qualifier-subtitle of “marcato e energico”.

Dynamics, expression markings under the score and articulation figures remain as

written in the original work, but rhythmic accompaniment figures are added by the second

player. The figures added include a prominent arrastre at the beginning of the work, walking

bass lines (also known as marcato en cuatro), “percussive” sounds using alternate syllables in

combination with a walking bass line, semiquaver patterns underneath a melody, similar

rhythm and melodic contour accompaniment.

Pedal notes are used in the first six bars of C, with crotchet pulsed pedal notes and

keyed arrastre figures in the ad lib. bars. The initial C section and the ad lib. repeat are both

36
marked with “Frasear (use phrasing)” in the solo line and “Tempo estable (keep the

tempo)” in the accompaniment section.

Group 2: The original genre of the work is somewhat difficult to identify, with the

significantly slower tempo than marked on the original score failing to create a sensation of

“energico”. The “marcato” is very prominent in execution of written accents. The aspect of

“etude” is not prominent in the solo line due to the speed, but some aspects of technical

ability and execution are outlined in the accompaniment figure during difficult written

semiquaver passages in the lowest register of the instrument.

Group 3: Characterisers specific to tango are marked in the accompaniment

figures, including arrastre and alternative articulation methods. During the initial C section,

rubato, a glissando, and a gruppetto are used. The second repetition of the material

includes addition of repeated notes at pitch (the “stammering trill”) and prominent rubato

moving both ahead, with early phrase beginnings, and behind the rhythmic accompaniment

figure. The repetition of the A section intensifies the written articulation. Fermatas are

shaped off with altered embouchure shape and intensified air to create a different timbre.

Group 4: Minimal rubato or dynamic alteration is used in the A and B sections

outside of bars 16, 18, 20 and 22, which feature the fermatas. The fermatas, written as

minims, are always measured for 3 beats of the tempo with the altered embouchure

creating a prominent crescendo in the last beat of the held note. Tempo throughout A and

B is consistent, with the accompaniment’s tempo in C remaining consistent while the

soloist uses very free rubato above the accompaniment line. Tempos used range from 115

BPM in the A section (and recapitulation thereof) with a direct change to 109 BPM at the

B section. C is played with accompaniment at 64 BPM.

37
Patrick Gallois

Group 1: Gallois’s performance generally reflects the score as written pitch and

rhythm material during the A and B sections, with altered articulation. The C section

features alteration of rhythm and strong use of rubato, with no alteration of written

pitches.

Group 2: The genre of etude as technical challenge is noticeable, with tempo and

choices of rubato assisting in the impression of technical difficulty. Marcato as a qualifier is

present in the execution of accents without being overly prominent in the texture or

changing the timbre in execution. Energico is effectively conveyed through the execution of

technical passages and through the joining of melodic lines in the C section.

Group 3: No arrastre figures or melodic alterations are present in the work. C is

played with very strong rubato and alteration of rhythm, both in the initial section and in

the ad lib.

Group 4: Gallois takes the work at 148 BPM during the A section and includes an

accelerando into the B section, consistently sustaining a tempo of 154 BPM until C. The

recapitulation of A is repeated at the same speed. Tempo within bars is generally

consistent, with semiquavers often treated as soloistic runs with variable rubato. The

alteration of fermatas is achieved in multiple ways; both by the alteration of embouchure

and increase of air for the “overblown” effect, in the first two cases, and by vibrato in the

latter two. Interestingly, Gallois’s vibrato during the later fermata notes in bars 18 and 22

(and their repeated A section equivalents at 80 and 82) is used in such a way as to intensify

the quality of sound and create an alternate sonic moderator with which to move the

intent of the phrase forward, with no vibrato in the initial attack of the note and the speed

of the vibrato increasing towards the attack of the next internal phrase while holding the

note.

38
Eugenia Moliner

Group 1: Again, Moliner and her duo partner Azabagic have created their own

arrangement of this work; this time for flute and guitar. The flute part remains intact as

written in its original form with respect to note pitches and written rhythm, with allowance

for usage of rubato and the internal addition of two bars of music. The guitar

accompaniment begins as a percussive accompaniment on the body of the instrument, with

the rhythm used underlying the 3-3-2 pattern with accentuation in the same place as the

flute line and using two disparate percussive high/low sounds. Bar 15 is the first strong

deviation from score, as an extra four beats are added as a rest in the flute line while the

guitar plays a similar rhythmic line, now pitched. From bar 16 until the end, the guitar

functions as an embellished marcato en cuatro line played in crotchets, rarely using a crotchet-

crotchet minim line at the end of phrases. It is worthy to note that Piazzolla’s

accompaniment for this work as published for saxophone and piano lists his piano writing

during the A and B sections as prominently using variations on the 3-3-2 pattern rather

than crotchet bass line, with the exclusion of bars in the melodic line that also deviate from

the 3-3-2 pattern (eg. bars 26-30, 44-48).

Other deviations from the flute score occur at the fermata points; no fermatas as

written are held during the performance. A similar deviation as found in bar 15 occurs once

more at bar 75, during the recapitulation of the A section; both flute and guitar play a 3-3-2

held unison for four beats before continuing with the written work.

Group 2: The work’s genre as etude is made clear, with technical passages

performed clearly at speed and with flair. Moliner and Azabagic use the guitar’s percussive

accompaniment to initially support the marcato as written in 3-3-2, but with the guitar’s

departure from unison rhythms after bar 16 the flute becomes less audible in the marked

39
accentuation, taking away from the marcato as apparent to listener. The energico is assisted

by consistent flow between the pair, with the speed of the performance and interaction

between soloist and accompaniment line adding to the sensation of energy and movement.

Group 3: 2 major characterisers are audible. The accompaniment’s percussive line

at the beginning echoes the tambour function found elsewhere in Piazzolla’s works.

Moliner’s freedom of expression within semiquaver lines in the A and B sections brings a

sensation of improvisatory freedom, lingering on the first of many groups before rushing

to the next phrase. Improvisations within the C section revolve primarily around a sense of

greater continuity within the phrase, with the phrases occurring as an accelerando-ritardando

over the 6 bar segments. No pitch alterations are made within the solo line at any point.

Group 4: The tempo of the initial A section sits comfortably at 148 BPM, with

rubato movement within individual bars. The recapitulation of A begins a little slower,

consistently sitting at 140 BPM with a sudden accelerando in the final two bars. In the B

section, Moliner and Azabagic choose to sit back at 125, with a sensation of “winding up”

performed with an accelerando for eight bars, then a similar movement in the final eight

bars before C.

C’s tempo moves between 90 and 100 BPM, with the movement forwards bringing

tension and interest to the phrase and focusing primarily on arriving at the middle section

of each six-bar phrase.

Irmgard Toepper

Group 1: Accuracy of the score is highly prioritised in Toepper’s performance. No

deviations from the score’s written pitch or rhythm material are observable. The methods

of execution are appropriate with regard to the ideal method of classical flute playing.

There is little to no involvement with potential nuevo tango era idiosyncrasies.

40
 Group 2: The genre of etude is apparent, with the technical challenges later in the

work observable to the listener while being performed very competently. Toepper’s intent

with regards to the work’s instruction of marcato is apparent, with written accents

performed cleanly and prominently in a way which does not interfere with the established

tone colour. The energico is readily apparent, with the tempo beginning at 138 and relaxing

gradually to 130 BPM over the A and B sections.

Group 3: Potential characterisers of tango nuevo are absent—there is no

incorporation of idiomatic features, improvisations or use of rubato within phrases in

sections A and B, with some rubato being used sparsely at C’s ad libitum section. Tone is

maintained evenly throughout with standard classical articulations.

Group 4: Energy is sustained via accentuation without extreme tempo alteration

from the marked score suggestion of 140 BPM. Rubato is used through the section marked

“ad lib.”, with minimal usage otherwise. Dynamics are performed as marked within the

boundaries of consistent sound quality, using a clear, consistent tone quality throughout.

Comparisons

Group 1: Candidates discussed had differing viewpoints with regards to adherence

to the score as authorial intent. Both Toepper and Gallois predominantly kept to score

material, with rubato present during the ad lib. C section; a method of execution considered

to be appropriate within the classical flute tradition. Barile and Daroux adapted the score as

written, including modifications as discussed with regard to potential interpretive practices

that are considered tango idioms. Finally, Moliner and Fain created or utilised

accompaniment parts, with both accompaniment lines utilising the marcato en cuatro figure

and with Moliner’s using the 3-3-2 in the beginning of the work. This stands in contrast to

Piazzolla’s published accompaniment, which predominantly reinforces the solo line’s 3-3-2

41
rhythm throughout. Overall their performances are representative of a method of thought

associated with tango. However, Fain’s performance in particular departs from the original

score’s intent with regards to tempo.

The effect of authorship with respect to written score material is considerable;

candidates were able to establish their performance as being safely within the score

material, or able to establish their interest in stepping beyond those boundaries in some

way.

Group 2: All candidates interpreted the marked qualities of the work in different

ways, generally succeeding in conveying the quality of “etude”, when viewed as a technical

work. All performers convey the qualifiers of molto marcato e energico in distinctly varying

ways, predominantly through tempo and articulation choices. However, Fain’s performance

is noticeably slower. The accompaniment can be viewed within the duo as adding some

energy to the work in complex semiquaver accompaniment, but the overall sensation of the

work is heavy rather than energetic. The marcato sensation is competently and clearly

conveyed both in the solo line and accompaniment. Moliner’s choice of execution with

regards to accents creates difficulties for the listener, as the accents are not dominant over

the guitar’s accompaniment. Consideration should be made in performances of any

arrangements as to how the solo line is prioritised over the accompaniment figures, so as to

add to the work rather than take away from its intent. The question of interpretive practice

with respect to performance often requires that the performer consider the effect of score

alteration upon the original melody; whether it is obscured or added to by the

embellishments and alterations is of primary importance.

Group 3: Of all factors, the characterisers chosen to express the tango or tango nuevo

qualities of the work were the most disparate among all performers. Toepper remains

firmly entrenched within the classical aspects of the work, with no additional interpretive

42
practices that could be seen as belonging within the tango tradition. Gallois involved

minimal interpretive practices in the A and B sections of the work. Barile, Daroux and

Moliner execute semiquaver passages in an uneven, improvisatory fashion, with Barile also

playing paired quavers in the A section with a “dragging” sensation on the first note. Fain

does not, though the accompaniment line as written in rhythmic unison could complicate

this issue, changing it from a solo line as viewed to soli.

A keyed arrastre motion was used by both Daroux and Fain at the beginning of the

work, with the arrastre-like tone colour and shaping out of fermatas in the second part of

the A section used effectively by Barile, Daroux, and Fain. The same intent was conveyed

by both the air shaping, in the first two, and by use of vibrato in the latter two by Gallois.

The B section exhibits further rubato usage in semiquaver passages by Barile, Daroux, and

Moliner.

The C section is performed by all players with usage of rubato in the ad libitum

section. Barile, Gallois, Moliner and Toepper make no melodic alterations, with Daroux

and Fain using varying melodic alterations. Rhythmic alterations are made by all players

with the exception of Toepper.

Articulation varies, with Daroux using accentuation in a raw, intense manner which

interferes with tone colour. Barile plays similarly in the lowest register of the instrument,

creating a very harsh tone colour for effect. Fain’s accents are prominent, with her

secondary un-accented notes dropping quite significantly in dynamic and changing tone

colour, with the effect of better outlining the accented notes. Toepper, Moliner and Gallois

use standard execution of classical accents to good effect, without being particularly

striking in execution.

43
 The disparate choices in ornamentation and interpretation do not show any overall

support for one particular method of interpretation, with perhaps the exception of the

arrastre-like motion commonly used when coming out of held notes or used initially by

Fain and Daroux. Performers who chose to use melodic and rhythmic alterations did not

make similar choices in their placement, other than the C section being a common choice

for alteration of any kind. Performers are urged to do some listening both to Piazzolla’s

works and performances, as well as perhaps additional non-Piazzolla tango repertoire,

before making any performance decisions on their own part. Figure 2 shows a broad

classification of players’ usage of characterisers.

Few to no characterisers Some characterisers Prominent characterisers

Gallois, Toepper Barile Daroux, Fain, Moliner

Figure 2: Usage of characterisers.

Group 4: Tempo is the most prominent consideration when looking at the large

scale differing factors within these performances. The chosen tempos for the opening

section, originally marked 138 beats per minute, range from Fain’s sedate 115 to Daroux’s

more daring 162. The B section features a drop in tempo and small accelerando over the

larger phrase in both Barile and Moliner’s interpretations, while Gallois chooses to take it

very slightly faster, moving from 148 to 156. Fain and Toepper choose to remain at tempo.

During C, all performances except Moliner’s drop to roughly 60-70 beats per

minute. Moliner’s phrasing of C as a larger section of work is more effective given her

usage of a slightly faster tempo, providing some impetus for the decision. The

consideration of chosen tempo has a prominent effect on the listener’s attitude towards the

performance and perceived attributes of the performer’s execution; the performer is

advised to consider the intent they plan to convey when choosing a performance tempo,

44
and consider other factors with regards to the tempo chosen. Figure 3 shows tempo

choices made by each performer.

Tempo Table

Barile Daroux Fain Gallois Moliner Toepper

A: 136 A: 156-160 A: 115 A: 148 A: 148 A: 138

B: 115-128 B: 148 B: 109 B: 154 B: 125+ B: 130

C: 55 C: 80-120 C: 64 C: 59-90 C: 90-100 C: 59

A1: 138-142 A1: 156 A1: 115 A1: 148 A1: 140 A1: 138

Figure 3: Tempo table by performer for sections of Tango Etude no. 3.

Duration manipulation is used for all players during the C section, to varying levels

of intensity. Barile, Daroux, Gallois and Moliner all use flexible timing within the A and B

sections, specifically with regard to semiquaver runs; Barile and Daroux also use quaver-

specific rubato, with Barile’s focusing generally on lengthening the time taken to play notes

with written accents, while taking that time from the second quaver of the beat.

Vibrato is of interest specifically with regards to Gallois; his usage of prominent,

altered vibrato to create an effect of moving forward through the third and fourth fermatas

in the A section is notable, given that no other player uses vibrato in this manner. Barile

uses steady vibrato on his lengthened quaver notes to further accentuate them without

adding energy via excess air pressure, while all other players use it predominantly with

relation to the B section’s notes of more than a crotchet in length. All players use vibrato of

some kind within the C section, often in combination with a duration manipulator to affect

the intensity of the phrase.

45
 Dynamics are again across a broad range, as are the tone colours created through

the player’s application of airstream and embouchure shaping. Daroux’s tone colours used

are notable, given the intense quality of sound and effective intent shown by application of

significant air pressure during accents. The effect created is of an articulation that directly

affects the sonic moderation of all accents within the piece very noticeably to the listener,

in a similar manner to that of Piazzolla’s bandoneon “screaming”.

Both duration manipulation and sonic moderation affect the listener’s experience

of the work; Daroux’s method of accentuation is particularly effective in this regard,

bringing a sense of violent attack to the performance. The less intense performance

practices of other players do not provide as strong a contrast. A strong method of

articulation, achieved in whatever manner appropriate, should be considered as appropriate

for all performances of this work.

Chapter 5: Conclusion

Personal reflection

In the process of learning to understand tango, I often ran up against this idea of

“not tango”, especially when attending Reed College’s Tango for Musicians and talking to

tangueros. Often, they would explain “like this–because otherwise it doesn’t sound right!”

Although this analysis seeks to illuminate ways to assist performers in finding that

“rightness”, the sonic model of what is and what is not tango is still a difficult concept in

many ways. My own performance of the Tango Etude no. 3 was taken with consideration to

many of the aspects recommended within this paper, with especial care taken to accentuate

and shape phrases in a manner which resembled Fain and Daroux’s interpretive choices. I

also experimented with singing traditional and newer tango works, and listening to a wide

46
variety of interpretations of different tangos to identify what commonalities could be

explored and what differences were made even within the same tradition.

Summary

In completion of this analysis, I come back to the original intention of this work;

the discussion of potential paths towards an informed, coherent interpretation of

Piazzolla’s Tango Etude no. 3 through multiple methods of exploration.

This discussion has the potential to assist performers in their performance of this

work alone, but can also contextualise usage of idiomatic phrasing with regard to other

works in tango or tango nuevo works. Recording data showed precise reproduction of the

text as written for one player; others performed with traits idiomatic to the tango nuevo genre.

Aspects of each performance could be considered to be ideal or appropriate for the

performer, but the choice is left to each player with regards to final decisions made in any

performance.

This paper is one very small glimpse into exploring the possibilities and the joys

that can be found in tango. Given the extra-textual aspects of this work’s positioning

within the tango nuevo genre, multiple facets of discussion were included to provide several

methods of unpacking the work in performance. Understanding some of the factors that

can be interpreted, as well as examining where or how they are used, provides some

context for the classical flutist to approach this work with a culturally informed perspective.

This knowledge of potential interpretive practices also provides the performer with further

tools which can be used to create an artistically satisfying performance for both performer

and audience.

47
References

Barile, Claudio, flute. Etude 3. By Astor Piazzolla. MP3.

Barile, Claudio, flute. Tango etudes 1 and 3. By Astor Piazzolla. Concert at Teatro Cervantes,

Buenos Aires, 2009. MP4. http://www.claudiobarile.com/.

Brunelli, Omar Garcia, ed. Estudios sobre la obra de Astor Piazzolla. Gourmet Musical

Editions: Buenos Aires, 2008.

Cannata, David Butler. “"Making it there: Piazzolla's New York concerts." Latin American

Music Review 26 (2005): 57-87.

Clarke, Ian. Zoom Tube. Surrey, England: Just Flutes, 2004.

Cook, Nicholas. A guide to musical analysis. J.M Dent and Sons Ltd: London 1987.

Cook, Nicholas, Eric Clarke, Daniel Leech-Wilkinson, John Rink, eds. The Cambridge

companion to recorded music. Cambridge: New York, 2009.

Cook, Nicholas. “Methods for analysing recordings.” The Cambridge companion to recorded

music. 2009. 221-245.

Collier, Simon, Artemis Cooper, Maria Susana Azzi, Richard Martin. Tango! The dance, the

song, the story. London: Thames and Hudson Ltd., 1995.

Daroux, Cecile, flute. Etude 3. By Astor Piazzolla. MP3. Harmonia Mundi, 1998.

De Poli, Giovanni, Antonio Rodá, Alvise Vidolin. “Note‐by‐note analysis of the influence

of expressive intentions and musical structure in violin performance”. Journal of New

Music Research 27 (1998): 293-321.

Dick, Robert. The other flute: A performance manual of contemporary techniques. New

York: Lauren Keiser Music Publishing, 1989.

48
Dolan, David, et al. “The improvisatory approach to classical music performance: An

empirical investigation into its characteristics and impact.” Music Performance Research

6 (2013): 1-38.

Drago, Alejandro Marcelo. “Instrumental tango idioms in the symphonic works and

orchestral arrangements of Astor Piazzolla. Performance and notational problems:

a conductor’s perspective.” DMA diss. U of Southern Mississippi, 2008.

Fabian, Dorottya. A musicology of performance: Theory and method based on Bach’s

solos for violin. Cambridge, 2015.

Fain, Paulina, flute, and Patricia De Dalt, flute. Etude 3. By Astor Piazzolla. MP3. iTunes,

2014.

Fain, Paulina. “Adiós Nonino: Transcripción del solo de Astor Piazzolla.” Unpublished

instrumental teaching material. Tango Sin Fin, 2016.

Fain, Paulina. En flute en el tango (The flute in tango): A fundamental method for playing

tango music. Ricordi: United States, 2012.

Gallois, Patrick, flute. Etude 3. By Astor Piazzolla. MP3. Deutsche Gramophon, 1996.

Gorin, Natalio. Piazzolla: A memoir. Trans. Fernando Gonzalez. Winona, Minnesota:

Amadeus Press, 2001.

Hellaby, Julian. Reading musical interpretation: Case studies in solo piano performance.

Ashgate: England, 2009.

Henken, John. “Tangazo: Astor Piazzolla.” La Phil. 2016. Accessed 15/03/16 at

http://www.laphil.com/philpedia/music/tangazo-astor-piazzolla.

Holten-Andersen, Maximiliano. “Reinventing the tango: A comparative analysis of Matos

Rodriguez’s La Cumparasita and Piazzolla’s Otoño Porteño.” DMA diss. U of

Ottawa, 2012.

Moliner, Eugenia, flute, and Denis Azabagic, guitar. By Astor Piazzolla. MP3. Bridge, 2010.

49
Koh, Eunyoung. “Renovation of traditional tango: The jazz influences of Astor Piazzolla.”

M.Mus diss. Chonnam University, 2013.

Kutnowski, Martin. “Instrumental rubato and phrase structure in Astor Piazzolla’s music.”

Latin American Music Review 23 (2002): 106-113.

Lavocah, Michael. “Listening to tango dance music—a beginner’s guide.” Todo Tango.

Undated. Accessed 10/3/16.

<http://www.todotango.com/english/history/chronicle/448/listening-to-tango-

dance-music-a-beginners-guide>

Lawson, Colin, Robin Stowell. The historical performance of music; an introduction. Cambridge;

Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Leech-Wilkinson, Daniel. “Recordings and histories of performance style.” The Cambridge

Companion to Recorded Music. 1st ed. 2009. 246-262.

Lerch, Alexander. An introduction to audio content analysis: Applications in signal

processing and music informatics. Wiley: Hoboken, New Jersey, 2012.

Liebman, Elad, Eitan Ormoy, Benny Chor. “A phylogenetic approach to music

performance analysis”. Journal of New Music Research 41 (2012): 195-222.

Link, Kacey Quin. “Culturally identifying the performance practices of Astor Piazzolla’s

Second Quinteto”. MMus Thesis. U of Miami, 2009.

Link, Kacey Quin. “The music of Buenos Aires: Exploring contemporary tango music

from a performer’s perspective”. DMA Thesis. U of California, 2013.

Link, Kacey Quin, Kristin Westland. Tracing tangueros: Argentine tango instrumental

music. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016.

Lucas, David Gómez. “La influencia del jazz en la musica de Astor Piazzolla. Analisis de

Tango Suite”. Undated. Accessed 24/11/15.

<http://www.migueltrapaga.com/partituras/David_Gomez_Lucas.pdf>

50
Mantega, Fain. “Piazzolla’s tango etudes”. Henry Lemoine: Paris, 2014.

Merrit, Carolyn. Tango nuevo. University Press of Florida: Florida, 2012.

Molazadeh, Sheila. “An analysis of Astor Piazzolla’s Histoire du Tango for flute and guitar

and the influence of Latin music on flute repertoire.” MMus Thesis. California State

University, 2013.

Nielsen, Christine S., Juan Gabriel Mariotto. “The tango metaphor: The essence of

Argentina’s national identity.” International Studies of Management and Organisation 35.4

(2005): 8-36.

Núñez, Victor Manuel Rodriguez. “Finding Piazzolla in tango: a comparison between the

traditional tango “La Cumparasita” and Piazzolla’s tango “Adios Nonino”.” Lester

B. College of the Pacific, undated.

Okamoto, Akane. “Nicholai Kapustin’s eight concert etudes, Op. 40: Reflections

on analysis, practice, and performance”. DMA thesis. University of Toronto, 2013.

Ollivo, Yann. “Tango-etudes (6) ou etudes tanguistiques”. Henry Lemoine. Undated.

Accessed 12/12/15. <https://www.henry-

lemoine.com/en/catalogue/fiche/27733>

Pinson, Néstor. trans Josephine Lagerlow. “Interview with Osvaldo Requena,” Todotango.

Undated. Accessed 14/03/2016.

http://www.todotango.com/historias/cronica/180/Requena-Entrevista-a-

Osvaldo-Requena/

Palmer, Caroline. “Music performance”. Annual Review of Psychology 48 (1997): 115-138.

Piazzolla, Astor. Tango etudes pour flute seule. Henry Lemoine: Paris, 1987.

“Astor Piazzolla: in portrait” BBC OpusArte documentary, 2005.

Possetti, Hernan, trans. Marife Caicedo. En piano en el tango (The piano in tango). Fondo

Nacional de las Artes, 2014.

51
Quiñones, Jessica.

“Constructing the authentic: approaching the ‘6 Tango-etudes pour flute seula’ by

Astor Piazzolla (1921–1992) for interpretation and performance”. Ph.D thesis, U of

Huddersfield, 2013.

Quiñones, Jessica. “Tango like a tanguero: Five little tips to help a classical flute player

perform tango music.” The Journal of the British Flute Society 30.2 (2011): 49-53.

Rink, ed. Musical performance: A guide to understanding. Cambridge: United Kingdom,

2002.

Rink, ed. The practise of performance: Studies in musical interpretation. Cambridge:

United Kingdom, 2009.

Smith, Caeli. “Hooked on tango.” Strings, 3 (2008): 12.

Stevenson, Joseph. “Astor Piazzolla: Etudes tanguistiques for flute solo (Tango-etudes).”

Allmusic.com. Undated. Accessed 25/06/15.

<http://www.allmusic.com/composition/mc0002403740>

Stravinsky, Igor. Poetics of Music (In the Form of Six Lessons). Harvard University Press:

Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1947.

Toepper, Irmgard, flute. Etude 3. By Astor Piazzolla. Naxos, 2000.

Tsai, I-Ching. “The evolution of the tango and Astor Piazzolla’s tango nuevo” DMA thesis.

Claremont Graduate University, 2005.

Viladrich, Anahi. More than two to tango. University of Arizona Press: Tucson, 2013.

52
Appendix A: Tango etudes and harmonic skeletons

Figure 4: Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987).

53
54
 Figure 5. Piazzolla, Tango Etude no. 3 (1987). Harmonic skeleton outlining chords as written
in accompaniment and accented notes within each bar. Lagerlow, Dickenson, 2016.

55
56
Appendix B: Piazzolla’s Adiós Nonino: Score/performance comparison.

Figure 6. Piazzolla, Adiós Nonino (1959). Here shown with score reproduction as written on top
line, with transcription of one method of execution in performance by Fain (2016).

57
58