À même le son de l’orgue : improviser, recréer, composer à la tribune de la Trinité
Bibliographic record
Abstract
À partir de l’exemple du grand orgue de l’église de la Trinité à Paris, de celui d’Olivier Messiaen, qui en fut le titulaire pendant 60 ans, et de mon travail actuel à ce poste, cet article cherche à repenser l’activité de l’organiste créateur à sa tribune et à situer sa singularité dans le champ de la création musicale, aux croisements de l’improvisation et de la composition. Grâce à de nouvelles sources, l’étude, voire la remise en actes, de différentes pratiques de Messiaen à ses claviers conduit à mettre en question ces deux catégories et leurs hybridations. De leur confrontation émerge la problématique des relations entre instrument, son et écriture, sur laquelle l’orgue offre un point d’observation singulier. Quelques exemples issus de mes Études pour orgue (2006-2015) montrent comment l’invention en interaction directe avec les phénomènes sonores complexes de l’orgue peut contribuer à renouveler les liens entre improvisation et composition et à interroger les pratiques contemporaines de la création musicale.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".