Why did you choose to work with the performing media of acoustic instruments combined with electronics? What were the challenges you faced in combining the two and how did you overcome them?

Tristan: I like the mix of acoustic and electronic sounds because they offer up different opportunities as a composer. The flute has a breadth of tone colours and effects with a wide spectrum between noise and pure sonorities. The electronic part uses a granular delay effect which involves taking snapshots of the live flute sound and then playing back variations of these fragments at different times. In the same way that you might hear a bird call in nature and not quite know when the response will occur, in this piece the way the electronics respond to the flute part can never truly be predicted. This in turn means the flautist responds to what they hear and so each performance of the work will vary to a degree. The main challenge in combining the acoustic and electronic elements involved making sure both worlds complement each other in making an immersive listening experience. This was overcome to a large degree by allowing plenty of space in the notated part as well as involving improvisation in order to give the music a chance to breathe and allowing the electronics to respond without the texture becoming overly cluttered.

What was your compositional process?

Tristan: About two years ago I began notating short bird song transcriptions of recordings that I’d made over the years. I included them in a little notebook and I had no plans then to use them for anything specifically; I just thought it would be interesting to see how I could interpret these birdsongs using traditional notation. A year or so later I was chatting to Lamorna Nightingale, the flautist for whom Daybreak was written, and was telling her about this notebook and we put two and two together and the piece was on its way! The composition process involved me creating the electronics ‘patch’ (application) as I composed the flute part. I felt it was important to get a sense of how it would sound as I was composing as opposed to creating a piece and then thinking about adding on the electronics. Often I experimented with my voice (in lieu of the flute) when composing and this was useful to get a sense of the use of sound and silence in the piece. I ended up with a range of musical ideas that I then rearranged to make an effective structure and then created linking material. Of course, through this process I had to discard material that didn’t quite work with the rest of the music. As always this was difficult to do but important in streamlining the work and making the structure as ’tight’ as possible. 

How has the technology that you have used enhanced or hindered the musical possibilities of your piece?

Tristan: I have used technology in a number of previous pieces and I always find I feel the same way in regards to its positives and negatives. The thing about technology and creating electronic music is that the options are endless – literally! You can start working on something in the morning and by the end of the day you’ve added all these extra features or sounds and you’ve forgotten where you’ve come from. For me this is can be a negative when it comes to music technology – the temptation to keep adding features and making things more complex. I found myself faced with this situation a few times on this project! There are however numerous ways electronics have enhanced this piece. For one, the piece heavily relies on the spontaneous and unpredictable nature of sounds occurring and the performer’s reactions to them. This brings about a certain energy in performance that is different to fixed compositions where the piece is more or less the same every time it’s heard. Another way that electronics have enhanced the piece is simply the quality of the sounds it can produce. We hear transformations of the flute tone that do not occur naturally and this creates a halo around the acoustic sounds.

How did you develop your musical material throughout the piece?

Tristan: The musical material was primarily developed by taking what were originally small musical motifs and exploring ways to join them together to form longer phrases. In this way it’s the opposite to the traditional form of fragmentation where you have a long theme and then break it into smaller chunks. The main form of development then is reordering the motivic cells, sometimes abruptly and at other times with more subtlety. In any case I wanted to create the sense of being out in nature with different types of birds in the surrounds. Other basic techniques of development include direct repetition, variation, transposition and inversion. The piece begins with and occasionally settles into a slow-moving soundscape but this material is injected with more movement and energy before it breaks into frenetic dance-like music. In this faster style, the birdsong fragments are highly compressed and create a continuum of activity. 

How would you describe the process of collaboration?

Tristan: Collaboration has been an important part of the process. Initially I had very simple sketches that I brought to Lamorna and we experimented with them. If I wasn’t sure about a particular moment I’d just use text to describe what I was after and then we’d talk about the best way to notate the idea. 

What are some special considerations you need to take into consideration when performing Daybreak? 

Lamorna : The interesting thing about playing Daybreak is that even though it is a flute solo it feels more like an ensemble piece because of the way my own sound becomes part of the electronics track. I’m never quite sure what sounds I will hear because the electronics respond a bit differently in different spaces. It really feels like I’m out in the bush with lots of birds flying around me copying my sounds!