If you can understand a piece without comments, then you don't need them. But listeners can't understand a piece if they read something like you are reading now during the performance. In general, I try to compose in such a way that the concert hall does not turn into a library. But the piece was written during my creative crisis, when I was under the influence of radical solipsism. And when you are under the influence of radical solipsism, then many things in life are no longer right, and if you compose a piece in such a state, then I think you would have to explain something about it.

The core idea of the piece can be described as non-conformity on different levels. It consists of a process of growth, variation and permutation of 17 elements. These elements are small composed components that are projected onto two instruments, rhythmically very precise and sonically as close as possible. At the beginning of each instrument, a row of elements is created, and this row becomes longer with each repetition: 1 2; 1 3 2; 1 4 3 5 2; 1 6 4 7 3 8 5 9 2 etc.: thus, the new elements always appear between two elements that have already been there. This procedure creates two lines in which the number of an element does not correspond to its position in the line. Moreover, the two lines are shifted against each other and elements during the piece are slightly changed. After the formation, the rows are permuted until every change and mismatch between the position and the number are cancelled. At the end of the piece, one hears all 17 units in the "correct" order and without temporal shifts.