Performance Notes

I'm writing a piece for solo flute with extended technique and some unconventional notation and I was inserting a page in the score with performance notes about certain devices. It got me thinking about performance notes in general. I have the tendency to want to include more than is necessary; for example, I was thinking about adding what the piece is supposed to symbolize to aid the performer in interpreting the sparse and almost arhythmic music. Is this frivolous? What kind of tone does one take when instructing a performer in performance notes?

Performance notes are all up to the composer. Some composers leave them out altogether and some take up literally pages to cover.

Mine for example, are often a full page at least.

I direct tempo and performance speeds.

I tell that the performer is to never play my music slower or faster than the written BPM.

(I've always been very particular when it comes to that)

I tell them more specifically if notes are to be played in the same style throughout.

Some of my orchestral works have notes for the violins to be "brushed" in their eigth notes.

As my appreciation grows for my musical friends, I actually become a lot more lenient toward the performance.

I write these Serenades for my girlfriend, and I tell her to just enjoy them. No rules for her.

However, my orchestra buddies can follow more rules because between them and her, they can handle more precise musical directions.

So I guess it really depends on the audience...

Think about who you are giving the piece to.

Is it something like a Serenade, where the inspiration behind it is truly important, or is it just a sketch for the enjoyment of a performer?

I really find "performance notes" to seem unnecessary unless you plan on having the piece performed in a public concert.

You must decide what message you are trying to send.

Programme notes are usually there to explain some things about the piece, and is usually found in the concert programme of a performance of the piece (as the word would suggest :P )

What you mean is "performance instructions", which is what the players get to explain unconventional notation. And in that case, the rule of thumb is to explain things in the performance instructions/guidelines that are non-standard notational-wise. So, if you have a lot of flap-tongueing for the flute, then you might want to invent a symbol for that or use something someone else has used blablabla. But if it's just a couple of things, you can explain them in the score, just with an asterisk next to the first instance of that weird notation in the score, and an explanatory note at the bottom of the page.

If you have multiphonics, it'll be good to mention them and the fingerings in the performance instructions too.

Just generally, only bother explaining stuff that will not be immediately obvious to the performers. As a rule of thumb, again, get a book on notation (such as Gardner Read's book on notation, or for a more modern-focused text, check Kurt Stone's book, which I find absolutely great in any notation-related issues), and as both Read and Stone say in their books, don't invent new symbols just for fun - only do so if they communicate to the performers what you want more easily and more effectively than traditional notation. Generally, try to use traditional notation as much as possible, and familiar symbols. That being said, most extended techniques for instruments have more or less a couple of symbols associated with them, and you will find these in the aforementioned books, so make sure you are familiar with them before choosing to use unconventional notation or your own symbols for stuff that already have symbols associated with them.

Hope that helps :)

P.S. Also, take a look at pieces using extended techniques, mostly Crumb's stuff (he's written something for flute and something else, I think, which uses a lot of extended techniques).