We live in eclectic times in which I think we can distinguish two principal stylistic currents: Avant-garde/Post Avant-garde and Neo-Tonality. This last one embraces Neo-Romanticism, Neo-Impressionism , Minimalism, Ethnic Music, New Age Music and numerous other currents which have the same origin. Personally, I feel close to Neo-Tonality and in particular to Neo-Romanticism, but in the original sense of the word, which is often confusedly assimilated to the other ones.


My music arises from an emotional necessity, sustained, however, by rational forms and techniques, but without technical, graphic and emotional complacency. Furthermore, I think that this conception of Art should not only be valid for Neo-Tonality but also for the Avant-garde and Post Avant-garde styles. Distinction must be made between live artistic innovation and experimentation with an end in itself.


I wish and hope for a New Humanism. A revaluation of established Forms but with new internal structures. Certainly not a mere return to past models.




I don’t believe in Composition based on formulas, designs and doctrines of preestablished techniques that do not allow wide flexibility, that can not be modified or even radically changed according to the interior necessities, both conscious and subconscious, of the composer. Neo-Tonality (which as well as pure Tonality may include moments of Atonality or Politonality) on the whole has intrinsic logical qualities and a flexibility that allows a good balance between rationality and artistic intuition (spiritual and creative, at times elusive even to the composer himself). I believe in the necessity of an organic system of Composition, not only applicable to a single work but to the entire artistic conception peculiar to the composer. I have a preference for Symphonic Conception, above all orchestral and often in cyclic form.




In my compositions I use recurring rhythms that are clearly distinguishable and that can be memorized or are at least recognizeable to the ear. I am not inclined towards countless complex rhythms, either superimposed or in succession, which in reality only sound like clusters or like a succession of equal values to the ear. Consequently, I believe in well defined themes. According to me clusters can be used as an accompaniment to themes. My conception of Composition stands at an equidistant position between the world of symmetry and that of asymmetry.




I believe in the contextual use of various techniques of the past and of the present (including the minimalist ones). I believe in a clear harmony, well defined and, in a wide sense, consequential, that is, structural. My harmony is essentially Pan-Diatonic with Pan-Cromatic moments. Generally I use a principal tonal centre (but without all the traditional functions of tonality) and one or two subordinate centres which create different levels of tension. The single harmonies may also be identical to the traditional ones but are set against eachother in a different way and have directional and resolutive forces of a different type. Infact, though my base line sustains the harmony, it often does not generate it. The combined use of these chords and tonal centres creates ambivalent tonal, polytonal and even atonal effects.




My thematic ideas are often conceived in blocks and consequently also the orchestration is conceived most of the time in great masses rather than in rarified timbres. I use many doublings. I have a preference for the masses of the woodwinds, brasses and strings meant as unities which are well distinct and can also be superimposed. I like to force instruments towards their extreme registers so as to obtain particular expressive tensions; nonetheless without making use of instrumental virtuosisms with an end in themselves.