This dissertation develops a synoptic approach to the systematic identification and comparison of the distribution of material from the model in the Kyrie and in the Credo of six parody masses of Palestrina, Lassus and de Monte, published between 1570 and 1600. These masses are grouped in pairs and each pair is based on a different model. Knowing that the compositional approaches to parody vary from one composer to one another, the objectives of this research are as follows: (1) comparison of the parodic approach of two composers in masses based on the same model; (2) comparison of pairs of masses, considering that Palestrina and Lassus treat two of the three models; (3) comparison of the three masses of Lassus written on three different models. / The synoptic approach to analysis is very interesting, because after the simultaneous identification of the motives in the model and in the mass movements (Kyrie and Credo), the entire complex of selected motives and their use in the construction of the modules become very easily detectable. The results of this research show that: (1) the model does not dictate the treatment, because the same model is treated differently by two composers; for instance, two masses of Palestrina based on different models are more alike, than those of Palestrina and Lassus based on the same model; (2) the model seems to be more attractive to the composer when it is one of his own compositions; for example, Palestrina borrows more material from his madrigal Io son ferito to build his Missa Petra Sancta, than Lassus does it in his Missa super Io son ferito ahi lasso based on the same model; (3) the style of the model does not determine the style of the mass; motifs from a non-imitative model can be treated in imitation in the mass, and (4) the sections of the Kyrie are more suited to formal development (generated by the repetitions of modules), than those of the Credo.

A study of selected chance and indeterminate piano pieces was made with a two-fold purpose: (1) to provide an intermediate stage between the composition and performance of the selected works and (2) to illustrate the diverse ways spontaneity may be invoked. The investigation centered on three points: (1) the problems the performer might encounter in examining the pieces, (2) implications of the instructions and (3) possible realizations of the score. While each score examined showed a slightly different approach to chance or indeterminacy, the pieces within the two categories were seen to exhibit common features. Generalizations were made in three broad areas: (1) the instructions in the scores, (2) the notation and (3) possible solutions. The instructions in the indeterminate scores were found to be relatively straightforward; the performer is made aware of his choices or alternatives and manner of performance is discussed. Instructions in chance works are less explicit; the performer is not directed to any one solution. Some explanation of the notation is given and the performer is led to discover how extensive his freedoms are. Indeterminate works on the whole are found to use traditional notation. The notation may be altered in some way, but retains a resemblance to its traditional source. Chance notation is very diverse, but three general categories exist: (1) works using traditional notation, (2) works using traditional and non-traditional (graphic) notation and (3) works using only graphic notation. The possible solutions of indeterminate works are concerned with either the juxtaposition or the metric relationship of material. The degree to which the choices are guided varies in the works discussed. Possible solutions of the chance works involve interpretation of notation and various ideas presented in the instructions. The performer must respond in an individual way, drawing on his own ideas. In general, analyses of the works illustrated some features that might be expected in other chance and indeterminate works. / Arts, Faculty of / Music, School of / Graduate