Had supper with Paul and Betty Bell last night. Some of the discussion was about being utterly and incontrovertibly old. I said once more that I was really surprised at the continuing drive to write music � stuff which seems to be completely different from what I have done before. It didn�t quite tie in with how I felt about many aspects of my life�. Well I suppose there are some it does link with � lots of novelty this week.

End of the first week in the new organisation � I am going on a training course next week which introduces the fundamentals of process improvement via a practical simulation. This is an absolute must-do. In some ways the process is about controlling creativity and aiming at standardisation. It�s the kind of thing that I need to keep my flat ticking over. Routines.

The Midi organ unit that I saw yesterday is rather preying on my mind. I have always thought that the Hammond sound units were over priced when you consider how good the average organ patches are in softsynths and sound cards. However having analog style controls that can be modified in real time is a great idea. I have always enjoyed the Hammond sound � as I was driving somewhere and the DJ played Jimmy Smith�s version of Bluesette from the early 60s.It was light and punchy and had some great brass harmonies shaping the arrangement plus Kenny Burrell pushing the rhythm. There a lot of unique recordings that he made at that time � big studio sessions done in New York. I always wanted my flute to sound like a Hammond � once I half managed this by processing a sample of it.

Its quite hard to write about work � there are various ideas or models around of what the new institution could be. A bit like this one � a bit like that one. One way into all of this is to clarify what in three years time the organisation needs to show that it has produced.

I looked again at the Fifths piece that I am working on. The question arose � should I be able to tell a story about it � first there is a kind of dominant build up of stacked fifths � then a simple rhythmic cell is introduced on two instruments � then there is the first idea in terms of a rhythmic/harmonic blend ��. And so on and so forth. Is writing a piece a matter of working some material until you find it has achieved some coherence that enables the composer to offer a semi technial scheme of this kind?

One of the things about Webern that makes people repeatedly take an interest is that he came up with a completely new way of having music sound � the phrase is that he taught people to listen to music in a new way. Even when he arranges Bach it sounds like Webern. You might think of Cage�s prepared piano pieces in the same light � and people certainly think in those terms about Lamonte Young. Satie might be another example. Varese another. So the question would be whether in the cases of these innovations you can still use � or the composers would still use the same kind of language to decribe whats going on. Whether there is some kind of standard narrative space that music exists in � and so when you are developing a piece you should think of your journey before you make it with that vocabulary in mind. Just take for example beginning/middle/end. Do pieces have to work always within that elementary narrative format. Could there be a piece which was jus beginning/end or just middle. This drags the issue into say the territory of Young�s Composition NO 7 � the one Terry Riley did last week.

I am listening over and over to this postFifths piece � reconstructing its possible narrative � wondering if this narrative is complete � or if I created a narrative in different terms, then it would be complete. It certainly ends by thinning out � it simplifies � and it starts in one place and ends in another. So it has beginning/end � is there a question about the coherence of the middle?