I have composed only two pieces for solo piano in the past: one in 1994 and one in 1996. Both compositions began with the establishment of certain limitations. The former limited the piano's range (upper half only) and the order of note appearance (a type of serial technique), while the latter used only the central octave and consistently began measures with the highest and lowest notes.

How many instruments with 88 keys and nearly 200 strings in total are readily available? Piano music might be considered the result of extracting from the potential of 'music for up to 200 people,' but upon closer consideration, with two hands and ten fingers, the number of notes that can be instantly produced (unless it's a cluster) is at most 15 or fewer. Given this, this instrument (and indeed keyboard instruments in general) can be said to possess a unique performance style. However, it is precisely this that can be called 'pianistic.' In that sense, it is not difficult to imagine that what is idiomatic through a 15 (strings) to 15 (fingers) relationship (or 200 to 200) would be entirely different from what is 'pianistic' and idiomatic through, for example, a 200 (strings) to 15 (fingers) relationship.

In any case, a 'work' is the manifestation of a defamiliarized state achieved by setting certain 'limitations' on various aspects such as the instrument and performance style, and simultaneously reflects the composer's perspective on the instrument itself and how it should be notated as a work.

Limitations in This Work

So, what are the limitations in this work? While the range is not explicitly limited, nor is there an inherent adherence to specific scales or series, I believe there are influences from musical tendencies where elements of certain limitations are prominent: from minimalism in terms of limiting pitch material and development, from pointillism in terms of limiting motion, and from the sound art movement (Onkyo-ha) in terms of sounds that seem to partially extract overtones. These can be summarized as follows:

• Deviation from limited sonorities, modulation of sound
• Limitation (or exclusion) of acoustic structure and melodic/physical motion
• Limitation of interval structure and simple stepwise progression of sonorities

The title, reminiscent of Kaela Kimura's 'Ring a Ding Dong' (or perhaps Akiko Wada or F. Liszt), derives from the fact that the ideas and partial acoustic structures for conceiving the work are based on the frequency analysis of the sound of the 'Toki no Kane' (Bell of Time) in Kawagoe City, Saitama Prefecture, thus indicating a so-called 'campanological' inspiration. While it is almost impossible to reproduce acoustic structures including microtones on a piano tuned to equal temperament, the bell is reflected in the work as a hint for its acoustic composition.