Collections of themed recordings curated by John Noise Manis

GAMELAN SCARLATTI

I Putu Gede Sukaryana (Balot)

 

Sanggar Kembang Ceraki - Gamelan Scarlatti

 

I Putu Gede Sukaryana (b. 1987) or Balot as he is better known among his peers, is a musician and composer from the village of Beraban in Tabanan regency. Like most Balinese musicians with conservatory training his competence in gamelan music is broad. He is an active performer with proficiency in multiple gamelan repertoires as well as experience as a tablist. From large state‐sponsored festivals and competitions to performances associated with the social obligations (ngayah) of his local village and temple communities across Bali, he is also versed in a wide range of performance settings. As a principal member of the established arts group (sanggar) Ceraken, he has both performed and composed new works that challenge the distinction between tradition (tradisi) and modern (moderen)—terms with distinct connotations in Bali. His versatility as a musician and interest in musics globally (specifically Indian Hindustani and Carnatic traditions and Western art music) forms a wide sonic palette from which he draws inspiration in his own creativity.

As a talented and aspiring artist on Bali, he navigates the disparate demands associated with being a full‐time musician—a life he has chosen. At the age of 15, when many of his peers decided to attend the local vocational high school that would prepare them for jobs in the tourism industry, he made the bold choice to pursue his interest in gamelan at the more distant high school of the performing arts (SMKI) in Batubulan, Gianyar—a one hour commute from his home near Tanah Lot (hence the nickname Ba‐ Lot). Citing a desire to broaden his horizons, he made this decision in spite of his father’s suggestion to attend the local high school. Upon arriving at the conservatory, however, he faced an unexpected reality: most of the students enrolled at the school had far more experience with gamelan. He recalls initially feeling intimidated, but this soon waned. By the end of his two‐year course of study he had proved himself a talented and capable musician and established considerable rapport with one of the school’s faculty members, the internationally renowned eccentric, musician, and composer I Madé Subandi.

 

Anyone fortunate enough to witness Subandi and Balot together will instantly recognize the bond that has developed between the two. Subandi is nothing short of a musical iconoclast within Balinese music. In an environment replete with politics, corruption, and self‐ importance, he goes against the herd in a manner that appears as effortless as it is effective—nobody within his orbit escapes unscathed. His effect on Balot has not been restricted to the musical, as Balot reflects most appreciatively on the impact Subandi has had on his attitude towards life and creativity more generally. In 2006, immediately after graduating from SMKI, Balot began to participate in Subandi’s Sanggar Ceraken. The group reflects Subandi’s personality and is thus a place that harbors technical skill and prolific creative output without the pretense that typically follows. Here creativity is light and refined, group solidarity is natural instead of forced, and process is as important and enjoyable as product. Ultimately, Subandi has created a unique space where established and aspiring artists are encouraged to explore new creative possibilities. At Ceraken Balot also had the opportunity to teach children’s gamelan groups (2006‐ 2010) and garner experience working with foreigners, both as a teacher and collaborator. Many of Ceraken’s projects, including the earlier Gamelan Cage (2013) release on this series, involve artists from abroad, and without a doubt they have played a part in cultivating his unique approach to creativity.

 

Coinciding with his invitation to join Ceraken, Balot began working towards a higher degree in music at the Denpasar Institute for the Arts (ISI Denpasar). In 2008 he travelled to India with the school group and returned home with tabla, which have since become an important part of his musical life. Later that same year, and motivated by recent encounters with Indian classical music, he composed the piece Jugalbandi. Drawing inspiration from a concept in Indian classical music of the same name, which refers to dynamic interaction between performers, the piece includes gamelan selonding and semar pegulingan executing call and response passages. As the title also suggests, the piece is a tribute to Subandi (Jugal‐ bandi).

 

In 2009 Balot undertook his final examination (ujian) at ISI, which involved creating a new work to be evaluated by a panel of faculty judges. In the months leading up to the exam he developed a radical idea and consulted several established composers about his ambitions. This included Subandi and Balot’s advisor at ISI, I Madé Arnawa—who contributed Gamelan Stravinsky (2015) to this series. Both confessed that Balot would have to choose between good marks or remaining faithful to his ideas. Balot chose the latter. His new work, Ri.Tik (ritma =rhythm, ketik =type), which involved a typewriter, gamelan instruments, and his personal computer, was inspired by a TV program in which a journalist reported that the laptop his son recently brought home failed to inspire him to write to the same degree as the typewriter it replaced. Balot aimed to communicate through his composition that new technologies needn’t render earlier technologies obsolete, stating ‘we should respect the past…it doesn’t matter how modern a new technology will make you appear if it lacks a connection to your brain…don’t change just because everyone else is’. The piece wasn’t a critique of new technology per se, but instead a critique of those that looked down on others who fail to live up to their expectations of modernity. According to Balot, each person makes use of methods that correspond to their individual lived experiences and thus they should be free from such judgement.

 

After graduating from ISI, Balot worked closely with the gamelan group in his local banjar (hamlet) and was invited to compose several pieces for groups participating in competitions. Free from the time constraints that accompany higher education, he also began to spend a bulk of his time performing as a professional musician. In 2012 he worked with Ceraken on the Gamelan Cage project under the artistic direction of Andrew C. McGraw, and in 2013, the Gamelan Stravinsky project directed by Balot’s former adviser, I Madé Arnawa. Shortly after the Gamelan Stravinsky project came to an end, Arnawa invited Balot to participate in a composition project funded by the Kelola Foundation. The criteria for the compositions, as outlined by Arnawa, required that composers create pieces appropriate for performances associated with religious observance (a bulk of the performance opportunities for gamelan music on Bali). Drawing inspiration from a private manuscript on composition written by Arnawa, which included ideas for creating compositions using images, Balot realized an experimental piece of music generated from the Balinese Onkara (symbol for OM). The piece, titled Genta Hrdaya, was performed on a gamelan selonding and is featured on Yantra Productions’ Gamelan Taruna Mekar (2015).

 

In 2013 Balot composed Anomali, an exploration (explorasi) for reong (a series of small horizontally suspended gongs played by several musicians). The piece was inspired by the internationally renowned Indonesian composer Slamet Abdul Sjukur (1935—2015), whose ideas have circulated widely among young Balinese composers for some time but have only recently been incorporated into the local conservatory’s curriculum. Balot was particularly inspired by Sjukur’s minimax ideas, which stress that the limitations within which a composer works are not to be interpreted as obstacles to a composition’s success but challenges to be overcome. The goal is to achieve maximal results from a limited material reality. In an era when performances at the state‐sponsored festivals grow larger every year, requiring ever more personnel (musicians, dancers, and other production staff)—best represented by the emergence of the performance genre gamelan colossal (requiring >50 performers)— Balot, like many of his peers, finds greater satisfaction working with smaller groups, witch is a approach compatible with Sjunkur’s minimax ideas. For Anomali, Balot worked with three musicians and created a unique and rich texture generated from predetermined rhythmic patterns executed on a circular formation of small gongs. Part way through the piece, and without interrupting the texture, the musicians begin to circumambulate the formation of gongs such that the pitches available to each player shift as they move around the circle. The piece is intricate and engaging, and because of its minimal performance requirements—few musicians and easily transportable instruments—it has enjoyed repeated performances. Among these were presentations at GEOKS in 2013 and the Bali Arts Festival (Pesta Kesenian Bali) in 2014 and 2015. The piece has also generated some buzz within the international gamelan community.

 

Domenico Scarlatti (1685—1757) was born in Italy and likely received his first instruction in composition from his father, the renowned composer Alessandro Scarlatti. In 1719 he moved to Portugal to tutor the Portuguese princessMaría Bárbara and remained on the Iberian Peninsula satisfying the musical needs of an aristocratic milieu for most of his adult life. Following a brief stint in Rome and Seville (1727‐1733) and after Bárbara married into the Spanish royal family, their work continued in Madrid where he resided until his death in 1757. Apart from these threads tracing minor plots in his life story, his biography is something of a void into which we can only speculate. This has had the effect of limiting wider recognition of his musical prowess because composers with more definitive biographies better appeal to today’s musicologists, who often pursue the relationship between a composer’s life and work. Much of his oeuvre also challenges historical musicology because it fails to conform to strict periodization, instead straddling the aesthetics of both Baroque and Classical.

 

Sanggar Kembang Ceraki - Gamelan Scarlatti

 

The Keyboard Sonatas

Although he worked in a variety of musical forms, Scarlatti is best known for his 555 keyboard sonatas, which form one of the most significant yet least understood repertoires in Western keyboard music. Reflecting his virtuosity as a keyboardist, their grandeur is often ascribed to an extraordinary symbiosis that must have existed between his hands and the keyboard. Of the more than five hundred sonatas only 30 (K. 1‐30) were published during his lifetime. A great deal of conjecture surrounds their supposed pedagogical nature, Spanish influences, origins in improvisation, chronological order, and the instruments on which they were composed and played during his lifetime, but much of this is based on a dearth of historical facts and remains contested among specialists. Which of the sonatas were composed for the harpsichord? Which for the pianoforte? Were some of the pieces composed according to the pedagogical needs of María Bárbara? As fascinating as such questions are they remain difficult to answer definitively. The absence of biographical details and notes in surviving early manuscripts also means chronologically ordering the sonatas has proven somewhat elusive, but this hasn’t prevented several scholars from establishing chronologies. Among the most highly regarded is Kirkpatrick (1953)—the numbering also used to refer to the sonatas on this album—but two alternate chronologies have since been proposed. Such a state of affairs needn’t be considered detrimental to our appreciation of the sonatas, however. In fact, the lack of historical details surrounding Scarlatti’s life and creativity frees us from a retrospective musicological gaze that favors biography and chronology, wherein a predilection for the logic and order of musical development across works leads us to assume that it is present. In light of this, W. Dean Sutcliffe (2003) invites us to consider the possibility that without these details, we might be liberated from their effects on perception and thus permitted to be drawn into the musical nuance of the pieces themselves.

 

The Creative Process

Scarlatti -> Sciarrino -> Balot -> gamelan

Giovanni Sciarrino (A.K.A John Noise Manis) is no stranger to gamelan music or sparking cross‐stylistic and cross‐cultural creativity. He believes cross‐cultural musical development is most successful when ‘classic masterpieces’ serve as the seeds to creativity, rather than the ‘solitary auto‐inspiring self‐gratifying state of the composer’. To the purists he says ‘a valid re‐creation of a classic work should be considered an addition rather than a substitution’. His inspiration for Gamelan Scarlatti originated in a ‘reliably assumed closeness’ between the musical languages of Scarlatti’s keyboard sonatas and Balinese gamelan music, as well as the potential gamelan offered for freeing the sonatas from the constrained timbres of the keyboard. When considering the best candidate for exploring the sonatas, Sciarrino recalled that Balot had made an impression on him during the recording of the earlier Gamelan Cage and Gamelan Stravinsky albums, and when this was coupled with the ‘bonus’ of Balot’s ‘splendid character’, he was the obvious choice.

Sciarrino initiated the project by generously outfitting Balot with the recording equipment necessary to record the album himself. Balot then sent recordings of each note in his gamelan to Italy for analysis. Using these recordings Sciarrino measured the tuning of the gamelan and established a ‘Closest Western Approximation’ (CWA) of its seven‐tone scale, which served as the primary vehicle for transmitting the sonatas to Balot.
Closest Western Approximation (CWA)

 

C# D E F# G# A B
A Major / F# minor

 

Instead of working from notation Balot worked from MIDI renditions that restricted the sonatas to the CWA. When a note fell outside the CWA the closest available note above or below replaced it. Sciarrino describes the process of selecting the replacements as ‘laborious’ because he tested all possible combinations before settling on the configuration that sounded best to his ears. In most cases the changes in character that resulted from this procedure were fairly subtle, but in a few pieces modulations into new keys led to radical shifts in mood. How much this takes away from the original is to be interpreted by each listener. As Sciarrino relates, ‘something is lost, something is gained’. Some of the MIDI renditions also divided parts between different instruments to aid Balot in teasing out separate lines, and most were slowed down to better facilitate the process of aural transmission. Regardless of their faithfulness to the original, in Balot’s hands the MIDI renditions were fruitful inspiration for creativity.

Although the pieces were restricted to approximations of the pitches available in Balot’s gamelan, other challenges remained. Most significantly, adapting music composed for ten fingers into the very different instrumental idiom of gamelan. Balot approached each piece with repeated listenings during which he first considered the combination of instruments necessary to reproduce it. He aimed to remain as faithful to the MIDI renditions as possible, but was challenged by the need to divide contrapuntal lines that stretched across multiple octaves among his gamelan instruments—most of which are restricted to a single octave. Throughout the project Balot explored a number of strategies for dealing with this challenge. The most frequent method involved dividing lines between musicians with access to notes in different registers. When this wasn’t the case, octave equivalences were used in order to restrict lines to the range of specific instruments, but this had the effect of transforming their contour. In order to prevent this, on a few occasions the lines were compressed in order to prevent them from stretching beyond the reach of specific instruments. In K. 294 (track 2), for example, a descending arpeggio that stretches across multiple octaves is compressed into a stepwise descent. Balot felt it was more important to maintain the shape of the descending line than the harmonic implications of the arpeggio.

 

The Scarlatti keyboard sonatas are known for their quick tempi, and while the pace at which they unfold is not remarkably fast for gamelan musicians, the nature of the melodic lines—composed for fingers—is considerably foreign when converted into the interlocking figuration (kotekan) that most Balinese gamelan musics employ to execute passages at this speed. As a result, passages were occasionally altered when they were converted to kotekan, though Balot always aimed to retain their original shape and character. In K. 491 (track 9), for example, several melodic lines are transformed into entirely new melodies constructed from Balinese kotekan, yet their original character is not entirely lost. When passages were not altered, the figuration that resulted from Scarlatti’s melodies was unconventional and a challenge for the musicians to memorize. Meeting such challenges throughout the project certainly expanded their musicality.

 

At rehearsals musicians functioned as Balot’s mnemonic aid, recording passages to memory while he worked through the material phrase by phrase. At the end of each rehearsal what had been established was recorded for safe‐keeping, should the musicians later forget. Throughout the process, when Balot discovered passages that resembled Balinese gamelan he felt free to highlight the connection and incorporate his own ideas. In K. 426 (track 3) several motifs drawn from legong repertoire can be heard on the gender rambat.

The pieces were recorded in the order they are presented here, in three sessions over the course of nine months. The group worked through four pieces at a time. Once these had been learned they were recorded outside in a quiet location behind Balot’s home. Working in batches of four allowed the musicians to focus on the pieces at hand and freed them from having to memorize and maintain twelve that would only be recorded after they had all been learned.

 

The Gamelan

The gamelan instruments heard on this recording are from Sanggar Kembang Ceraki’s new seven‐tone gamelan semar pegulingan— completed in 2015. The instruments are host to special carvings of human faces, each displaying a different emotion, and a unique tuning. When ordering the bronze keys for the gamelan Balot told the pandé (metal‐smith) that he wanted a tuning similar to the five‐tone pelegongan of Banjar Binoh Kaja, in the village of Ubung Kaja, North Denpasar, but that he also had intentions of collaborating with Western musicians. Thus, the five‐tone selesir mode (keys 123‐56 on Balot’s semar pegulingan) is loosely based on the Binoh pelegongan (also tuned to selisir), while the two remaining pitches (4 and 7) were added by the pandé according to his taste and Balot’s plans for the instruments. The pelegongan in Binoh is lower than most semar pegulingan, and as a result Balot’s semar pegulingan is also lower. An influence of Western tuning is also apparent. The highest octave is very near to a Western diatonic scale. In fact, when Sciarrino measured the tuning of the gamelan in order to establish the ‘Closest Western Approximation’ (CWA), he was struck by how similar the tuning was to A Major / F# minor. To facilitate comparison, the tuning of Balot’s gamelan has been plotted alongside the CWA in the chart below (see Tuning Comparison).

 

Before this chart will make sense to those unfamiliar with Balinese gamelan several distinct features of Balinese gamelan tuning should be introduced. First, it is important to stress that standardized tuning is non‐existent in Balinese gamelan. From one gamelan to the next variation is inevitable and celebrated. This, however, is not to say that anything goes. Tuning concepts and tuning systems, though varied across ensembles and locales, are as resolute as they are widespread, and the tuning of a gamelan is a serious endeavor undertaken by specialists. Second, keyed instruments are tuned in pairs in order to produce a phenomenon called ombak (beating produced by subtle differences in pitch between paired instruments). The lower of the pair is called pengumbang (ngumbang), the higher, pengisep (ngisep), and the rate of beating controlled by the distance between the two (e.g. a distance of 8 Hz results in beating of 8 cycles per second). In order for the entire gamelan to pulsate at the same rate the distance between ngumbang and ngisep is maintained across the entire pitch gamut, which complicates the tuning process significantly because octaves must be stretched and compressed. Consider the following anecdote: a desired ombak of eight beats per second requires that ngumbang and ngisep are 8 Hz apart. Thus, if a pitch in ngumbang is 200 Hz then ngisep must be 208 Hz for them to pulsate at a rate of eight cycles per second when sounded together. Things get tricky, however, when tuning the same note pair an octave higher.

 

Sanggar Kembang Ceraki - Gamelan Scarlatti

 

Theoretically, we would simply double the frequencies of both ngumbang and ngisep to get their corresponding octave equivalences. However, when we double 200 we arrive at 400 and when we double 208, 416. The difference between the ngumbang (400 Hz) and ngisep (416 Hz) has doubled and thus the rate of pulsations per second is now sixteen instead of eight. To compensate for this a gamelan tuner (tukang laras) compresses or stretches the octave (altering either both ngumbang and ngisep or just one of the two) to allow the pair to remain 8 Hz apart.

Although ngumbang and ngisep appear to merge closer together as the pitch rises in the Tuning Comparison, this is merely an artifact of the logarithmic nature of our hearing (represented by the logarithmic Y axis in the chart). When the frequency of a given note is doubled we perceive the new frequency as the same note only an octave higher. This means that the number of Hz in each successive octave also doubles (e.g. A4 440 Hz -> A5 880 Hz = 440 Hz; A5 880 Hz -> A6 1760 Hz = 880 Hz). This also means that because the difference in pitch between paired notes in a Balinese gamelan remains constant throughout the entire pitch gamut (~8 Hz in Balot’s gamelan) the distance we perceive between them narrows as we move up the frequency spectrum. If we measure the difference in pitch between note pairs using cents, which unlike Hz remains constant across octaves (1200 cents per octave), this is all the more obvious. For example, if we take the lowest note pair in Balot’s gamelan and compare it to the CWA using cents we arrive at C# ‐35 and C# +25 in the ngumbang and ngisep respectively. The gap between them is 60 cents (greater than half a semi‐tone) but when we compare the gap between this note pair in subsequent octaves it narrows (51 cents, then 25 cents, and finally 11 cents in the highest octave) despite the fact that the difference between them in Hz remains the same (~8 Hz).

In the Tuning Comparison a correspondence with a Western diatonic is clearly noticeable in the highest two octaves, where the ngumbang corresponds exactly (difference < .62 Hz) with four pitches of the CWA (C# D E A) in the highest octave, and three pitches (C# D E) in the octave below. Furthermore, the three remaining pitches of the ngumbang in the highest octave are all within 5 Hz of the CWA (in an octave that spans > 1000 Hz this is quite remarkable). New bronze gamelan keys tends to rise in pitch as they ‘dry’ and need to be retuned several times before the pitch finally settles. This could explain why some of the keys in the lower registers, which are thinner and ‘dry’ more quickly, have grown sharp, and why a few of the ngumbang are sharper than their corresponding ngisep.

In addition to the instruments drawn from Balot’s semar pegulingan, K. 113 (track 4) includes vocals, kendang (drum), and ceng‐ceng (small cymbals); K. 114 (track 10) includes suling (bamboo flutes); and K. 348 (track 12) includes a reong borrowed from the local banjar’s gamelan semara dana (gamelan gong kebyar with two additional notes). The reong is slightly lower in pitch and has different intervals than Balot’s trompong and the two can be heard together on track 12.

 

About Sanggar Kembang Ceraki

In 2008 Balot formed Sanggar Kembang Ceraki at his home in Tabanan regency. The name of the group, meaning ‘flower of Ceraken’, signifies Balot’s desire to honor Ceraken, which fostered an approach to creativity that he associates with most cultivating his musicality. Until recently, Kembang Ceraki performed on Balot’s gamelan selonding—modeled after the selonding in Tenganan village and constructed by the late I Nyoman Parta Gunawan, who Balot visited frequently until his recent passing. Going forward, the gamelan semar pegulingan instruments will no doubt lead to new opportunities for the group. Most of the musicians—now teenagers—joined when they were between the ages of 7 and 12.

 

Track Notes

1. K.25

1 Kantilan (pengumbang)

I Gusti Putu Arya Wira Kusuma (15)

2 Gangsa Pemadé

I Made Alit Widiarsana (16)
I Gusti Putu Arya Wira Kusuma (15)

2 Jublaǵ

I Made Rika Pradivta (16)
I Gede Wahyu Kurniawan (21)

 

2. K. 294

Trompong

I Kadek Yuda Bagaskara (19)
I Made Budi Astawa (27)

Gangsa Pemadé

I Made Alit Widiarsana (16)
I Putu Arya Deva Suryanegara (19)

Jublag

I Made Rika Pradivta (16)
I Gede Wahyu Kurniawan (21)

Kajar

I Gusti Putu Arya Wira Kusuma (15)

3. K. 426

2 Gender Rambat

I Kadek Yuda Bagaskara (19)
I Made Budi Astawa (27)

2 Gangsa Kantilan

I Gusti Putu Arya Wira Kusuma (15)
I Made Rika Pradivta (16)

2 Jublag

I Made Alit Widiarsana (16)
I Gede Wahyu Kurniawan (21)

 

4. K. 113

1 Trompong

I Kadek Yuda Bagaskara (19)
I Putu Arya Deva Suryanegara (19)

2 Gangsa Pemadé

I Gusti Putu Arya Wira Kusuma (15)
I Made Rika Pradivta (16)

2 Jublag

I Made Alit Widiarsana (16)
I Gede Wahyu Kurniawan (21)

1 Kendang

I Putu Gedé Sukaryana (Balot) (29)

1 Ceng‐Ceng

I Wayan Ari Widyantara (20)

Vocals

Yan Priya Kumara Janardhana (23)
I Komang Pasek Wijaya (20)
I Kadek Yuda Bagaskara (19)
I Putu Arya Deva Suryanegara (19)
I Wayan Ari Widyantara (20)
I Wayan Situbanda (20)

5. K. 95

Gender Rambat

Yan Priya Kumara Janardhana (23)
I Putu Arya Deva Suryanegara (19)

Gangsa Pemadé + Kantilan

I Wayan Ari Widyantara (20)
I Wayan Situbanda (20)

Jublag

I Kadek Yuda Bagaskara (19)
I Komang Pasek Wijaya (20)

 

6. K. 262

Jegogan

Yan Priya Kumara Janardhana (23)
I Komang Pasek Wijaya (20)

Jublag

I Kadek Yuda Bagaskara (19)
I Putu Arya Deva Suryanegara (19)

Gangsa Pemadé

I Wayan Ari Widyantara (20)
I Wayan Situbanda (20)

 

7. K. 278

Jegogan

Yan Priya Kumara Janardhana (23)
I Wayan Situbanda (20)

Jublag

I Wayan Ari Widyantara (20)
I Komang Pasek Wijaya (20)

Gangsa Pemadé

I Putu Arya Deva Suryanegara (19)
I Kadek Yuda Bagaskara (19)

8. K. 362

Jegogan

Yan Priya Kumara Janardhana (23)
I Wayan Situbanda (20)

Jublag

I Wayan Ari Widyantara (20)
I Komang Pasek Wijaya (20)

Gangsa Pemadé

I Putu Arya Deva Suryanegara (19)
I Kadek Yuda Bagaskara (19)

9. K. 491

Jegogan

I Wayan Situbanda (20)
I Kadek Yuda Bagaskara (19)

Jublag

Yan Priya Kumara Janardhana (23)
I Komang Pasek Wijaya (20)

Gangsa Pemadé

I Putu Arya Deva Suryanegara (19)
I Wayan Ari Widyantara (20)

 

10. K. 114

Jegogan + Suling

I Putu Arya Deva Suryanegara (19)
I Wayan Ari Widyantara (20)

Jublag

Yan Priya Kumara Janardhana (23)
I Kadek Yuda Bagaskara (19)

Gangsa Pemadé + Suling

I Wayan Situbanda (20)
I Komang Pasek Wijaya (20)

11. K. 67

Jegogan (pengumbang)

I Putu Arya Deva Suryanegara (19)

Jublag

I Wayan Ari Widyantara (20)
I Kadek Yuda Bagaskara (19)

Gangsa Pemadé

Yan Priya Kumara Janardhana (23)
I Komang Pasek Wijaya (20)

Gangsa Kantilan (pengumbang)

I Wayan Situbanda (20)

 

12. K. 348

Trompong

Yan Priya Kumara Janardhana (23)
I Komang Pasek Wijaya (20)

Reong Semara Dana

I Putu Arya Deva Suryanegara (19)
I Wayan Ari Widyantara (20)

Jegogan (pengumbang)

I Kadek Yuda Bagaskara (19)

1 Jublag (pengumbang) +
1 Gangsa Pemadé (pengumbang)

I Wayan Situbanda (20)

 

Statement from the Composer

“What is important is your mentality and openness. Music is more than gamelan. Gamelan is not just a Balinese phenomenon, it has spread around the world, why should we try to keep it the same? I want to learn new things, get new ideas, and participate in new collaborations.”

‐ I Putu Gede Sukaryana (Balot)

 

References

Personal communication with Giovanni Sciarrino (A.K.A John Noise Manis) September 2015 – April 2016

Personal communication with I Putu Gede Sukaryana (Balot) September 2015 – April 2016

Sutcliffe, W. Dean. The Keyboard Sonatas of Domenico Scarlatti and Eighteenth‐Century Musical Style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2003.

Tenzer, Michael. Gamelan Gong Kebyar: The Art of Twentieth Century Balinese‐Music. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2000.

 

Credits

Recorded by I Putu Gede Sukaryana (Balot) and Jonathan Adams in Desa Beraban, Banjar Batugaing Kaja, Tabanan during three sessions: October 23, 2015; December 15, 2015; and March 21, 2016.

Mixed in Italy by Giovanni Sciarrino (A.K.A John Noise Manis)

Artistic direction and MIDI arrangements ‐ Giovanni Sciarrino (A.K.A John Noise Manis)

Liner notes, Liaison, Photography, Video production ‐ Jonathan Adams

*The pitch measurements plotted in the Tuning Comparison were made just after the last recording session and taken from the jegogan, jublag, gangsa pemadé, and gangsa kantilan.

Sanggar Kembang Ceraki - Gamelan Scarlatti