A Locational Study of R. Murray Schafer’s Music for Wilderness Lake [1979]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Music for Wilderness Lake [1979] was a pioneering composition in the development of Canadian composer R. Murray Schafer’s (1933–2021) environmental works. Envisioned as a performance for twelve trombones gathered around Southern Ontario’s O’Grady Lake, it continuously evolved as the realities of the outdoor location shaped the compositional process and the premiere performance. Schafer was prompted to think about how an outdoor, rural location affects musical performances and what concessions it required. Despite the significant role Music for Wilderness Lake played in Schafer’s compositional output, it is too often scripted as a first step to his later environmental works. In this article, the author recontextualizes Music for Wilderness Lake by exploring the experimentation that took place as Schafer’s vision was adapted to performance and logistical challenges. One of the unique features of Music for Wilderness Lake is the use of a central raft on a lake, from which Schafer cued the full ensemble during the premiere. By examining the performance site, this article highlights how some of the aspects of the location that Schafer found exciting—wide spatialization of performing forces and lively echoes—affected the development of Music for Wilderness Lake. Using contemporaneous articles (Littler 1979, MacMillan 1979, and Sweete 1980); interviews (including Westerkamp 1981); sketches of the location; and the film made of the performance (Music for Wilderness Lake, 1980, Fichman-Sweete Productions); this article explores why O’Grady Lake was chosen for the premiere and how the space helped develop specific relationships among participants based on spatialization and instrumental groupings.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".