"Experimental" vs. "Avant-Garde" Traditions

Definitions are incredibly important to musical discourse and are often subjects of great controversy. As a composer, when I am asked the dreaded question of "What kind of music do you write?" I face a bit of an identity crisis. I could say that I write "art music" or "concert music" or "contemporary classical music". That last one always leaves a strange aftertaste; while it is comforting to identify with a tradition that is hundreds of years old, I also wonder why I feel the need to identify with it. Why not another musical tradition? Or a new one?

Composers of experimental or avant-garde music have struggled to define their music as well. What exactly is the difference between "experimental" and "avant-garde"? Are they the same?

My understanding is that "avant-garde" is a more general term, while "experimental" refers to some specific musical techniques that have become staples of that repertoire. The phrase avant-garde, according to Grove Music Online, first appeared in a military context, to describe one group clearing the way for the rest of the troops. Indeed, composers like Charles Ives and John Cage were pioneers in their fields, taking bold risks that paved the way for future composers to follow. The musical avant-garde has taken many forms, from serialism to Dadaism, but it has always been the cutting edge of musical developments, especially ones that may not really be accepted or understood until years down the road.

Reading Michael Nyman's piece on the definition of experimental music, I realized why this music is so revolutionary. While an average composer may experiment with a scale, a motif, or an instrumentation, experimental music focuses on experimenting with every possible parameter, most of which are completely outside of theoretical considerations, like the autonomy of the performer. Composers like Cornelius Cardew produced graphical scores (thereby experimenting with the parameter of notation as well) which freed the musicians to interpret the markings however they wished. In other pieces, a performer might be encouraged to tap or slap parts of his or her instrument or integrate vocals.

Experimental music has strong roots in philosophy. During the performance of a piece with chance procedures, the question arises: What is music? What is the life of music? For many of these pieces, the music lives and dies in each performance, because it will never be exactly the same twice. Recordings do not adequately capture these pieces either, because a recording only contains a single audience and musicians reacting to the particular circumstances of that performance. There is something profound about how the composer relinquishes a large amount of control in a piece with indeterminate elements. Lots of power is transferred to the performers, and the composer can only try to be happy with the results.

To reach a conclusion about the definitions, I believe that avant-garde is a broader term than experimental, because experimental music is just one category of pioneering, future-anticipating art. The experimental music movement that began in the twentieth century was characterized by several distinct compositional techniques, and while they may not be as specifically avant-garde as they were decades ago, they still distinguish this body of work.