2.1. Score

Gordon Mumma, who, like Alvin Lucier, David Tudor and John Tilbury, served as soloist in Music for Solo Performer in the early years (Mumma Reference Mumma1968: 69; Simmons Reference Simmons1969: 342), remarked in a 1968 essay about the piece how he was surprised that ‘as the musical use of elaborate and sophisticated electronic technology increases, passing works of art on to succeeding generations requires reverting to a kind of ancient oral tradition’ (Mumma Reference Mumma1968: 69). Indeed, the verbal score of Music for Solo Performer (Figure 2) was created after the fact, and perhaps not even long before its first publication (Lucier Reference Lucier1980).Footnote ² In early performances the soloists relied on direct instructions from the composer and a shared understanding of live electronics performance practice and experimental music aesthetics. In Mumma's words, they had to ‘[learn] the work directly from the composer’ (Mumma Reference Mumma1968: 69), and, based on that knowledge, had to find their own solutions when Lucier wasn't present (for David Tudor's 1967 performance at University of California Davis, see Tudor's 1989 interview (Tudor and Austin Reference Tudor and Austin1989), and for John Tilbury's 1969 London performance, see 2.2 below).

Figure 2

Alvin Lucier, Music for Solo Performer, verbal score (Lucier Reference Lucier1980). © Wesleyan University Press, used by permission.

In 1968, Mumma mentioned a ‘score’ (his quotation marks) that Lucier recently had prepared, ‘a kit of parts including electrodes, paste, lead-in wires, a differential amplifier and low-pass filter, and an instruction manual [that] awaits verification in the hands of future solo performers’ (Mumma Reference Mumma1968: 68). It seems like this ‘score’ was merely a set of devices beyond standard sound amplification equipment but essential for the performance of Music for Solo Performer.Footnote ³ As with John Cage's compositions for prepared piano where the composer held on to certain sets of preparation objects, at the time of the work's creation the understanding of what the piece essentially constitutes wasn't yet fully developed. Lucier would specify exact models and brands of equipment (Lucier Reference Lucier1967b: 40, Reference Lucier1972: 24, Reference Lucier1976: 60) until it became evident that the devices could be replaced by other models or even other technology that served the same purpose.

After his performance at the Fylkingen-Festival on 21 September 1966 in Stockholm, Lucier contributed a text about Music for Solo Performer to the following year's edition of Fylkingen Bulletin International (Lucier Reference Lucier1967b). The first part presents basically the same information given in the published verbal score, but in the latter part, after the general statements about alpha waves in the first paragraph, Lucier changes the perspective to that of a description of the performance at the Rose Art Museum of 1965 (and the Stockholm performance of 1966). He is avoiding a score's projective imperative in favor of a report's observational past tense.

The second part of the text is entitled ‘Remarks and suggestions for future performances’ and consists of six numbered paragraphs that encourage the performer:

Music for Solo Performer is Lucier's first experimental music composition, and it comes as no surprise that the composer who was used to precisely notating his works (even his Action Music for Piano (1962) records the performer's movements in rather precise graphic notation (Lucier Reference Lucier1967a)) was hesitant to call a verbal description of a performance a score. Lucier's attitude changed as his artistic work developed during the 1960s and 1970s, and he later considered verbal notation a worthwhile approach to communicate a work's essence without restricting the performative process too much. As he recently explained in relation to his Vespers (1970): ‘The score specifies a task to be accomplished, not a composer's idea of a fixed object. One would miss so much … by the presence of specific instructions. There would be no way to pin down the variables. Nor would I want to pin them down. They change themselves as the performance progresses’ (Lucier Reference Lucier2012b: 254).

2.2. An early performance

Some remarks on John Tilbury's performance of Lucier's Music for Solo Performer at Purcell Room in London on 25 February 1969 might shed some light on the relation between score and performance before the score's 1980 publication (Lucier Reference Lucier1980) when the composer was not immediately involved. A reviewer reports that the ‘charming young leather-jacketed pianist [John Tilbury] came on again, but sat in a chair. A solicitous nurse paid attention to the rear of his skull to which two wires were attached. These were linked up to the apparatus and consequent throbs were amplified at different volumes for nearly forty minutes.’ The reviewer left after twenty minutes, musing that he ‘had been allowed to share in the secret musical thoughts of the performer’ (Simmons Reference Simmons1969: 342).

While the duration falls into the aforementioned timeframe, two aspects attract attention: The notion of theatrical performance by having a nurse – probably recognisable by her uniform – attaching the electrodes at the back of the head (not the forehead), and the fact that percussion instruments are not mentioned at all. John Tilbury remembered some forty years after the performance the reason for that:

Tilbury can't remember ‘how [he] got hold of the piece, or what it said. … [He] did phone Alvin [Lucier] on several occasions … for advice and suggestions’ (Tilbury Reference Tilbury2013). The missing link might have been Gavin Bryars, who indeed handled the live electronics:

These accounts are undecided as to whether or not a written score existed in the late 1960s. In any case, just as Gordon Mumma had pointed out (1968, discussed in 2.1 above), personal communication with the composer remained crucial, and a set of electronic devices personally provided by the composer was used.

2.3. Recordings

Composer-supervised recordings of Music for Solo Performer provide information about the work and its performance only to a certain extent. They might be limited in duration due to the nature of the recording media (the 1982 LP versions last 13′30′′ or 15′ respectively (Lucier Reference Lucier1982)) or the context of their creation (the 1976 video of Music for Solo Performer in Robert Ashley's series of composer portraits Music with Roots in the Aether lasts about 28′ (Ashley Reference Ashley2005)). Also, they might be especially prepared for the recording media, like the recordings on the 1982 LP (Lucier Reference Lucier1982). Here, on Side A, Lucier ‘recorded and superimposed eight versions of Music for Solo Performer, overlaying pairs of Western Classical and Jazz percussion instruments, as well as a cardboard box and a metal trash can. On Side B Pauline Oliveros recorded four versions, each with a separate World Music percussion orchestra: Indian; West African; Chinese, Japanese and Korean; and Javanese’ (Lucier Reference Lucier1982, liner notes). Only the 2009 CD release (Lucier Reference Lucier2009) reflects, with a length of 39′14′′, the premiere performance's duration.

In most of the composer-supervised recordings we can detect sound from pre-recorded and accelerated alpha waves.Footnote ⁵ In his description of the premiere performance, Lucier states: ‘In addition to the speakers, an integrated threshold switch was employed to operate a tape recorder upon which was a tape of pre-recorded brain wave sounds accelerated 5 times to a frequency of 320 cycles’ (Lucier Reference Lucier1967b: 40; ‘340 cycles’ in Lucier Reference Lucier1972: 23). The calculation of the frequency ratio is misleading; what Lucier is actually referring to is that the brain wave recordings were played back in double speed and the result was recorded, and this process was carried out five times. This way the original frequency of 10 Hz, which is within the alpha wave range, was sped up to 320 Hz (10 Hz times 2⁵ = 320 Hz). However, the tape sounds used on the recordings are about one octave higher. Nicolas Collins (Reference Collins2013) recalls ‘working with a reel-to-reel tape with one channel of audio as twice as fast/high as the other. We would select one or the other to route to an ordinary (unprepared) speaker. In addition, with reel-to-reel tape recorders one had usually an option of a few different playback speeds, which would further transpose the recording by octaves. I can't be sure the tape was labeled with the “correct” speed, and occasionally the correct speed was not available for a performance anyway.’

Curiously enough, the recording of Music for Alpha Waves, Assorted Percussion, and Automated Coded Relays (Lucier Reference Lucier1989), a four-minute offspring from the recording session of the 1982 LP (Lucier Reference Lucier1982), does not seem to include any pre-recorded and accelerated alpha waves, even though the title emphasises the control mechanism Lucier mentioned in his description of the use of pre-recorded tape in Music for Solo Performer. Nicolas Collins, who is, with Jack Stang, credited as ‘recording engineer’ on the 1982 LP (Lucier Reference Lucier1982), reports that a 16-channel audio multiplexer was used that he had built and programmed for Lucier. The device was controlled by a SYM 8-bit microcomputer. It replaced an earlier hardware device Collins had built for Lucier during his undergraduate studies with him at Wesleyan University in 1975 and that would emit ‘a huge bang when switching the alpha’. The new device, however, served its intended purpose: ‘The software looked for patterns in the alpha and channeled it among the output channels according to an algorithm. For every minute of the performance the composer/performer could preset which channels would be available to algorithm – i.e., during the first minute only select among the 4 lowest drums; for minutes – play cymbals and gongs; etc.’ Nevertheless, Lucier used the device in only a few concerts, insisted on re-titling the recording for its CD release (Lucier Reference Lucier1989), and years later informed Collins that he had ‘deleted’ that version of the composition from his catalogue of compositions (Collins Reference Collins2013).

While the 1982 LP versions are rather dense and almost no silences occur, the 1976 video as well as the 2009 CD release give space to less active, almost sparse sections. It seems obvious that the LP versions focus on the sounding reality of the piece and the situation of the listener who is detached from the live performance experience with its theatrical aspects. The video, on the other hand – Robert Ashley used the rather new medium's possibilities to its full extent and documented Lucier's performance in one 28-minute shot – celebrates the soloist's sitting in an armchair and his techno-musical setup of brain electrodes, long cable beams and loudspeakers attached to various percussion instruments (Figure 3). The visual atmosphere is so intense that the actual sound is obviously not the sole focus of the video. Still, as Ashley points out today, the aesthetic decision to not edit brings the video itself into the realm of music, avoiding the distanced notion of music documentary.Footnote ⁶

Figure 3

1976 video of Alvin Lucier's Music for Solo Performer, from Robert Ashley's Music with Roots in the Aether (Ashley Reference Ashley2005: The Music of Alvin Lucier, 16′39′′). © Performing Artservices, Inc., New York, used by permission.

Unlike in any other composer-supervised recording, the piece is allowed to start slowly while the performer slips into alpha state. Actually, much time is given to the preparation of the performance, and the camera observes closely how an assistant (probably Robert Ashley (Ashley Reference Ashley2013)) fixes the electrodes to Lucier's head. It takes no less than five minutes for the first sound to appear. When the camera then slowly zooms out and starts wandering among the instruments, the lack of connection between recorded image and sound becomes apparent. The camera pans while the stereo field remains steady. And as much as the camera seems to scan the setup to witness sound production, at just two instances do we actually see an instrument vibrate: a reflection of light on the skin of a bass drum indicates the vibration of the reflecting surface, and at some point the lid of a cardboard box flaps eagerly (Ashley Reference Ashley2005: 11′50′′ and 20′10′′, Figure 4).

Figure 4

1976 video of Alvin Lucier's Music for Solo Performer, from Robert Ashley's Music with Roots in the Aether (Ashley Reference Ashley2005: The Music of Alvin Lucier, 20′22′′). © Performing Artservices, Inc., New York, used by permission.

3.1. Alpha waves

Music for Solo Performer is exclusively based on particular brain waves called alpha waves, alpha rhythms or alpha synchronisation. This signal is used to excite loudspeakers attached to percussion instruments. Alpha waves are sinusoid-like neurological oscillations caused by rhythmical neurological activity in the brain. They vary heavily in frequency and typically fluctuate between 8 and 13 Hz (see, e.g., Shaw Reference Shaw2003: 4).

It is traditionally assumed that alpha synchronisation occurs when no information is processed in certain areas of the brain. Consequently it was believed that putting the mind into a state of rest could enable a person to produce alpha waves. The absence of sensory information was one of the explanations for the so-called closing eye phenomenon. For most people it is possible to enhance the amplitude of these waves dramatically simply by their closing their eyes. Opening them again during a present alpha cycle, on the other hand, is often called blocking. Recent studies, however, show that this is not entirely true. Blocking does not always occur and it is assumed that alpha areas of the brain just split up in asynchronously pulsing areas (Shaw Reference Shaw2003: 6).

Electroencephalography (EEG) is the favoured method to measure alpha waves in a non-invasive way suitable for musical performance. Electrodes have to be placed on the scalp to record electrical activity of the brain. The smallest possible number of electrodes necessary is three, all of them placed on the forehead: one on each hemisphere of the brain and one in the middle as a reference to the resting potential of the brain. The reference electrode can also be placed on the performer's wrist to ensure the measurement of a voltage decoupled from the brain activity. After the two voltages has been acquired, the difference between the two has to be calculated and amplified to accurately detect the brain activity. This can be achieved by using a differential amplifier, where the reference electrode represents the resting potential of the human body and the sum of all variations of the other electrodes in relation to the reference constitute the brain activity. To determine the frequency band of the brain signals, spectral processing has to be performed. Since the advance of digital equipment, measurements have become more precise due to sophisticated signal analysis algorithms. For medical purposes and more accurate spatial resolution, usually 10 to 20 electrodes or a geodesic setup is used (Miranda Reference Miranda2010: 156). Generally, the sum of all brain activity is measured.

3.2. Devices

The technology used by Lucier for performing Music for Solo Performer is based on a simple neurological EEG measurement device. As described above, three silver electrodes, a high-gain, low-noise differential amplifier and a steep-band or low-pass filter capable of filtering out unwanted harmonics or neighbouring brainwaves are required.

For the initial experiments at Brandeis University with physicist Edmond DewanFootnote ⁷ two Tektronix Type 122 pre-amplifiers with a built-in band pass filter and an additional band pass filter (a device custom built by the United Transformer Corporation and a Krohn-Hite 330 M filter) were used to obtain the alpha signal (Lucier Reference Lucier1967b: 40, 1972: 22–23, 1976: 60).Footnote ⁸ The three electrodes were placed on the forehead of the performer and fixed with a headband. The Tektronix pre-amplifier had a maximum gain range of ∼30 dB, so a second one had to be wired in series to achieve enough amplification to boost the signal to a sufficiently high voltage range.

Both differential pre-amplifiers were employed with the reference electrode as a ground signal to amplify the difference between both hemispheres of the brain. Lucier worked with this setup at the premiere and at least one other performance of the piece (Lucier Reference Lucier1967b). This equipment, originally built as measurement devices, seems to have been the first choice for early performances because it was available and tested together with Edmond Dewan.

To simplify the electronics and to provide a portable device more suitable for touring, Gordon Mumma and William Ribbens constructed the Cybersonics Differential Amplifier Low Pass Filter, named after their enterprise Cybersonics, which operated in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The device, presented as early as November 1966, contains a differential pre-amplifier with a gain of 40 dB at an input voltage of 10–25 μV and a fourth-order low pass filter with a cutoff frequency of 14 Hz (Mumma Reference Mumma1968; 15 Hz according to Lucier Reference Lucier1972: 23).Footnote ⁹ The oscillograph of the filtered and amplified output shows that most frequencies above 14 Hz are erased (Figure 5). The signal shown here is a very short excerpt of a longer sequence. Alpha waves are usually produced in bursts, and therefore they have a decaying amplitude envelope. This results in a decrescendo roll of rather steady frequency that excites the percussion instruments.

Figure 5

Oscilloscope tracings of amplifier output before and after Cybersonics Differential Amplifier Low Pass Filter (Mumma Reference Mumma1968: 68). © University of California Press, used by permission.

John David Fullemann, a student of Lucier and founder of Magic Boxes Co, started to work on his own device for amplifying alpha waves in 1974, which he named Alpha Amp I. Fullemann built the device for experimentation on activating LED-lights with brainwaves. Alpha Amp I led to the development of Alpha Amp II in 1975, which was then used for performance (Figure 6). Lucier also purchased one of these amplifiers for Music for Solo Performer. Some improvements were made in regard to the version built by Mumma and Ribbens. Fullemann didn't refer to the Cybersonics amp but invented a similar design. The filter stages were realised with operational amplifiers instead of transistors to decouple the filter stages from each other. Furthermore, the cutoff frequency was pushed to 20 Hz. A headphone output was added, including a limiter stage and a passive volume control to monitor the appearance of alpha waves. Because of the massive amplification of ∼60 dB and the following limiter stage the alpha signal would result in a clicking sound (Fullemann Reference Fullemann2013b). Fullemann revised this amplifier in 1999 and built version III. The revisions applied to this version include an additional active band pass stage after the fourth-order low-pass filter (Fullemann Reference Fullemann2013a).

Figure 6

John David Fullemann's Alpha Amp II (1975). © John David Fullemann, used by permission.

It becomes apparent that it is not defined how to measure alpha waves to perform Music for Solo Performer. The choice of the cutoff frequency and the steepness of the filters determine the sound of the loudspeakers clapping against the instruments.

If we applied modern digital measurement techniques to Music for Solo Performer – in other words, algorithmic pattern detection – the events detected in the occurring bursts would manifest more sparsely. In contrast, filtering the signal doesn't necessarily mean the resulting signal would consist exclusively of alpha bursts. Rather, almost every signal which is recorded by the electrodes, especially noise and interference, will produce output after filter stages, and therefore produce sound on the percussion instruments. Hence the design of the measurement equipment has a tremendous effect on the sonic result.Footnote ¹⁰

4.1. Choice of instruments

The reference for performing the piece was the score and the following list of instruments provided by the composer (Lucier Reference Lucier2012c):

• • 1 large mixer, 16 outputs

• • 16 high-quality speakers, at least 12′′ diameter

• • 2 bass drums

• • 2 snare drums

• • 2 timpani

• • 2 cymbals

• • 2 triangles

• • 1 tambourine

• • 1 large tam tam

• • 1 small gong

• • 1 grand piano

• • 1 cardboard box large enough to contain a speaker

• • 1 metal trash can large enough to contain a speaker

• • 1 CD player.

The list, which roughly matches the choice of instruments suggested in the score (Lucier Reference Lucier2005a), seems to reflect personal preference as the score leaves the choice of instruments and other devices quite open to the performer. Lucier entrusted Hauke Harder and Nicolas Collins to make decisions on the choice of instruments, speakers and preparation in the manner of Lucier's performance practice of this piece. It was agreed not to use a piano because of practical reasons and to prepare smaller speakers in addition to a few 12′′ devices.

Since the performance took place in a traditional stage and seated audience setting at Haus der Berliner Festspiele, we decided to place the performer mid-stage and the percussion instruments in a symmetrical setup:

During the preparation the possibility of placing the instruments amidst the audience was discussed – an arrangement suggested by a flow-chart diagram (Mumma Reference Mumma1968: 68; Lucier Reference Lucier1972: 24) and applied quite often in preceding performances (Harder Reference Harder2012). At Haus der Berliner Festspiele, this was impossible due to the architecture and safety regulations of the space.

Additionally, a CD with pre-recorded alpha waves was played back using the stereo speaker system of the venue. The alpha waves were transposed into an audible range.

4.2. Speaker preparation

Generally, there seem to be two different approaches on how to activate the resonance of the instruments. Lucier suggests using large 12′′ speakers placed on or directly in front of the instruments. Ideally, the movement of the membrane should make an instrument resonate without even touching it, but this is rarely possible. Lucier favours cone-type speakers above horn-type speakers since ‘the air pressure from the cone excursions will cause the grill cloth to bump in reaction to the bursts of alpha. This bumping effect is an efficient means for resonating these instruments. The composer has found that the KLH Model 4 loudspeaker is fine for this purpose’ (Lucier Reference Lucier1972: 24).

In another technique employed in several performances of the piece done by other performers, solenoids or prepared speakers are used to activate the instruments. On the 1982 LP recording (Lucier Reference Lucier1982), Collins used solenoids to play metalophones. Later he would add cork to the speaker cones to get a more mallet-like sound (Collins Reference Collins2013). Harder started preparing small speakers with different material for his performances of Music for Solo Performer in 2007 and has continued using this technique (Harder Reference Harder2013). For the Berlin performance, we decided to mount several 7–9′′ speakers on microphone stands and prepared them with small spherical-shaped objects like wood, cork, rubber, plastic or bare metal screws. Similar to Harder's technique, a small cardboard tube with a plastic cap was fixed onto the membrane with rubber bands (Figure 7). Depending on which instrument was to be excited, an appropriate material was chosen: in other words, a screw for the gong or a wooden ball for the cymbals. During setup instruments were tested one by one and adjustments were made. Usually the distance, material and position would be changed according to the personal sonic preferences of the participants. Most of the decisions were made before the composer joined the rehearsal. When he did, Lucier just commented and adjusted a few speakers himself. He chose to abandon a few of the preparations in favour of letting the bare membrane almost touch the drumhead of the timpani. The sound of flapping rubber on the timpani enabled us to produce more low-frequency content and less dominant transients.

Figure 7

Prepared loudspeaker for Alvin Lucier's Music for Solo Performer, MaerzMusik, 23 March 2012, Haus der Berliner Festspiele. Photo: Giuliano Obici. © Giuliano Obici, used by permission.

4.3. Formal organisation

The form and length of the piece are not determined by the score, but it seems like Lucier has established a repeating framework for deciding how the piece is going to be performed.

Nicolas Collins and Hauke Harder were each operating eight instruments on eight faders at the mixing desk on the opposite side of the hall. Each assistant played the instruments on one side of the stage.

After the initial adjustments of the individual speakers had been completed, Lucier gave both assistants instructions on which instruments to activate at the beginning and which at the end of the piece. Furthermore it was decided that a climax in terms of density and loudness should happen in the second half of the piece. This loose improvisatory framework was used for a first run-through of the piece. During that run-through the composer would intervene when he liked or disliked what the assistants did. Other decisions made about the formal architecture were to have the gong almost as the only activated instrument for nearly five minutes at some point in the performance or the moment when the recorded and transposed alpha waves were to be played back on the regular speaker system of the hall. These were memorised and repeated in the next run-through and the performance.

Reconsidering the above-mentioned observations we see that the assistants play a crucial role in how the performance of the piece comes into being. The choice of instruments, the speaker setup and preparation, as well as parts of the formal organisation are decided upon and played, in large part, by the non-stage performers.

5.1. Music in sonification discourse

Neither the role of the assistant, who controls the flow of the alpha signal to loudspeakers and percussion instruments, nor the very fact that musical decisions are made during the work's performance are mentioned in most writings that refer to Music for Solo Performer as an early example of artistic sonification (Rosenboom Reference Rosenboom1997: 10; Schoon and Dombois Reference Schoon and Dombois2009: 2; Kahn Reference Kahn2010, Reference Kahn2013; Miranda Reference Miranda2010: 157–8; Grond and Berger Reference Grond and Berger2011: 391; Mullen, Warp and Jansch Reference Mullen, Warp and Jansch2011: 469; Grond and Hermann Reference Grond and Hermann2012: 216). Just a few scholars address the impact of the technology involved (Mumma Reference Mumma1968; Kahn Reference Kahn2010, Reference Kahn2013; Pickering Reference Pickering2010: 85), and only musically informed authors address the role of the assistant (Mumma Reference Mumma1968; Dewar Reference Dewar2009: 160; Rogalsky Reference Rogalsky2010: 135).

Already in one the founding texts of the sonification discourse, ‘An Introduction to Auditory Display’ by Gregory Kramer (Reference Kramer1994), a close connection between sonification and music is made, right at the time when sonification was about to be established as a tool for research and a field of study. Kramer uses a motto by Sufi teacher Hazrat Inayat Khan (1882–1927) from his Mysticism of Sound and Music – ‘in the realm of music the wise can interpret the secret and nature of the working of the whole universe’ (Khan Reference Khan1996: 6) – but replaces, without mentioning the change, ‘music’ with ‘sound’, thereby broadening the perspective considerably (cf. Straebel Reference Straebel2010: 292). In the aftermath, the International Community for Auditory Display (ICAD) has established a strong tradition of artistic sonification (of often questionable artistic quality), and only recently have scholars addressed the distinction of scientific and artistic sonification more thoroughly (Sterne and Akiyama Reference Sterne and Akiyama2012: 547–53; Supper Reference Supper2012: 252–61) or critically (Vickers and Hogg Reference Vickers and Hogg2006; Hermann Reference Hermann2008).

While arguing about different approaches to the definition of sonification and its connection to music, these authors usually don't question their understanding of what music is. Grond and Hermann (Reference Grond and Hermann2012) state that ‘we can speak of sonification when sound is used as a medium that represents more than just itself. In other words, sound becomes sonification when it can claim to possess explanatory powers; when it is neither solely music nor serves as mere illustration’ (213). But what does it mean for sound to be ‘solely music’? It seems that the authors set the concept of absolute music as a self-evident definition, thereby rejecting those concepts where music articulates entities beyond its sounding reality, may they be traditions of the art form, connotations of music history and theory, programmes or narratives, and so forth.

5.2. Music beyond the audible

Where Grond and Hermann (Reference Grond and Hermann2012) argue that ‘data inspired music … cannot be reduced to music’ (216), we claim that conceptual music cannot be reduced to sonification. The reception of Music for Solo Performer in the sonification community focuses almost exclusively on the aspect of signal production, but little thought is given to the performative aspect of the work, the explicitly musical decisions made during preparation and performance, or the role of the assistant. On the contrary, scholars have felt the urge to stress that ‘[in] Music for Solo Performer data are not used to make brain activity understandable but rather to emphasize the nature of thoughts and mental processes’ (Grond and Hermann Reference Grond and Hermann2012: 216). For our understanding, even this is asking too much. Why would Lucier address the ‘nature of thoughts and mental processes’ by using alpha waves to play a percussion piece?

The composer who has deliberately created the aura of a solo work by ‘[giving up] performing to make the performance happen’ (Siegmeister et al. Reference Siegmeister, Lucier and Lee1979: 287) is not to blame for an ill-informed interpretation, since giving (or not giving) secondary information about the piece is part of his artistic activity. The degree to which the work of art appears enigmatic is suggested by the artist. Music encompasses much more than mere sound. Its context, the aspects of its presentation and performance are an integral part of its very existence.

‘You see, one of the inaccuracies of the title is that it's not really for solo performer. You need someone to run the amplifiers, to pan the sounds around, to turn on one loudspeaker and then turn on another, and I've always, except once in Stockholm,Footnote ¹² done it with another player, an assistant’ (Lucier and Simon Reference Lucier and Simon2005: 52). The automation of this process, suggested by the composer in the score, never became part of Lucier's performance practice, but has been realised by other performers in recent years. Instead, the performance of Music for Solo Performer is a subtle play of hidden communication between soloist and assistant. This ensures the quality of the work on the level of musical integrity in terms of musical form (development, contrast, structure, etc.) and sonic surface (interesting sounds, diversity of sounds and rhythms, etc.) as well as on the level of performance with its creation of the image of a solo performer controlling the sounds by the mere activity of his thinking.