Ian Cross Centre for Music & Science Faculty of Music, - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Ian Cross Centre for Music & Science Faculty of Music, Cambridge www.mus.cam.ac.uk/~cross Paper presented to the Philological Society QMUL 9 November 2012

For most of the C20th, much writing and thinking about music was based on the premises that music existed as musical works and that these works are autonomous structures of sound with a meaning that is ‘purely musical’ and is valued ‘for-its-own-sake’. These views are still current in certain sub-fields of musicology (particularly musical aesthetics), but have come under increasing pressure from within and outwith musicology: • through the realisation that the concept of the "musical work" is itself a culturally particular—historically fairly recent—lens through which to view music • through an acceptance of forms of music other than those of the "classical canon"—popular musics, non-western musics—as requiring exploration and understanding • through an increased focus on music's meanings and significances as being bound to the contexts—social, historical—within which music occurs; • through an increasing awareness of music as more than just sound: in Merriam's (1963, p211-2) terms, "music cannot exist unless there is human behavior, for music is but a product of that behavior … the sound we produce, which comes through behavior, which in turn is shaped by concept, is judged both by the individual and by other members of his society in terms of its success in meeting musical criteria according to the principles accepted by that society"—music as sound , behavior and concept

Nevertheless, the notion of "music as sound" has conditioned views of music within the study of music cognition and has shaped how the field addresses music as an object of scientific study. Music cognition research as research into music as auditory object: Results of a search of the ScienceDirect database on 22 September 2010 in the categories Psychology and Neuroscience: Hence in ScienceDirect , of the >2,400 papers that are concerned with music in the psychological or neuroscientific literature, - ≈ 90% appear to address engagement with music in terms of listening Many of these studies are shaped by models related to theories of linguistic structure (e.g., Winograd, 1968; Lerdahl & Jackendoff, 1983), pattern perception (e.g., Narmour, 1989, 1992), and statistical processing (e.g., Eerola et al, 2001 ; Pearce & Wiggins, 2006; Rohrmeier, Rebuschat & Cross, 2011). Much of this work has produced extremely illuminating results, but addresses only one facet of what has come to be recognised as music

If ca. 90% of research in the cognitive sciences of music addresses music as sound, at least 10%—in fact, to be fair, probably considerably more—deals with music as overt behaviour—as action, often in the domain of music performance The counterposition of listening and performance seems natural in conceiving of music (usually in the triad composition, performance, listening) But research in ethnomusicology suggests that this apparently natural tripartite division of composer/performer/audience is no less shaped by historical, culture- bound conceptions than is the notion of the musical work—a huge number of examples from the ethnomusicological literature shows that music is as often performed by and for the participants as it is for any audience Such manifestations of music require a fundamental rethink of the frameworks within which they can be conceptualised and explored

Alan Lomax, in his Cantometrics project (1968), provided an early and at the time unique attempt to characterise music—in his case, purely vocal music—as behaviour across cultures. Lomax's project was unique in trying to address music as something other than a social construct with features intrinsically bound to its culture of origin; he approached music as a generic human capacity that varies from culture to culture but that is almost as identifiable within a given culture as language and that is, like language, susceptible to comparison across cultures on the basis of common and distinct features Lomax's classified instances of music on the basis of musical texture, timbre, melodic form, rhythm, etc., but the principal continuum that he employed to differentiate instances of musical behaviour ran from solo to "groupy"

Lomax, 1968, p22: Summary presentation of coding sheet (L-Leader, C-Chorus) Lomax, 1968, p22: Summary presentation of coding sheet (L-Leader, C-Chorus) Individualized and little integrated Groupy and integrated L with C (little L with C ( parts L with C (parts Parts independent (leadership submerged in 1 Leader/Chorus Solo differentiation) alternating) overlapping) choral activity) Relation of orchestra to vocal part Solo Simple accompanying relation Heterophony Orchestra has independent role 2 Relation within orchestra Solo Unison Heterophony Part independence 3 4 Choral musical organization Solo Unison Heterophony Polyphony Choral tonal integration Solo Poor to Very good 5 Choral rhythmic organization Solo Poor to Very good 6 7 Orchestral musical organization Solo Unison Heterophony Polyphony, polyrhythm 8 Orchestral tonal concert Solo Poor to Good Orchestral rhythmic concert Solo Poor to Good 9 Text part Wordy to Very repetitious, nonsense 10 11 Vocal rhythm Simple and regular meter to Irregular and free meter Vocal rhythmic organization Unison to Many independent parts 12 Orchestral rhythm Simple and regular meter to Irregular and free meter 13 14 Orchestral rhythmic organization Unison to Many independent parts 15 Melodic shape Arched Terraced Undulating Descending Melodic form Complex organization to Simple organization 16 Phrase length Very long to Very short 17 18 Number of phrases More than eight to One or two Position of final Bottom note to Top note in scale 19 Range of melody Monotone to Two octaves and more 20 21 Average interval size Monotone to A fifth or more Type of vocal polyphony Drone to Counterpoint 22 Embellishment Much to Little or none 23 24 Tempo Very slow to Very fast 25 Volume Very soft to Very loud Vocal rhythm Completely free to Strict tempo 26 Orchestral rhythm Completely free to Strict tempo 27 28 Glissando (gliding between tones) Constant voice gliding to Clearly separate tones Melisma (note load) One syllable to many notes, frequent to One note per syllable 29 Tremolo (quavering attack) Much tremolo, frequent to Little or no vocal quavering 30 Glottal effect (guttural attacks and Heavy and constant (glottal ornamentation) to No glottal 31 with embellishments) 32 Vocal register (voice placement) Very high falsetto to Very low deep-chest register Vocal width and tension Very narrow, squeezed, and hard to Very wide, open, and mellow 33 Nasalization Constant and heavy nasal sound to Free of nasalization 34 35 Raspy Very harsh, noisy, chesty sound to Clear and limpid tone Many notes heavily stressed (very forceful attack Accent to Very relaxed attack (no notes strongly stressed) 36 frequent) Consonants Precise enunciation of consonants to Most consonants slurred over and hard to hear 37 Lomax, A. (1968). Folk song style and culture . Washington DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

More recently, Thomas Turino (2008) has developed a less complex but more broadly grounded account of music across cultures as either presentational, as in western concert music, or participatory, as in many traditional cultures—and also in many contemporary instances of functional music-making in western culture, such as liturgical contexts, football matches, garage bands, recreational choirs, etc. Turino proposes a range of features as likely to characterise presentational versus participatory musics

Turino, 2008, p59: attributes of participatory and presentational musics Participatory music Presentational music Short open, redundantly repeated forms Closed, scripted forms, longer forms and shorter performances of the form available "Feathered" beginnings and endings Organized beginnings and endings Intensive [subtle] variation Extensive variation available Individual virtuosity downplayed Individual virtuosity emphasized Highly repetitive Repetition balanced with contrast Few dramatic contrasts Contrasts of many types as design Constancy of rhythm/meter/ groove Variability of rhythms/meter possible Dense textures Transparent textures/clarity emphasized; varied textures and density for contrast Piece as a collection of resources refashioned anew in each Piece as set item (although exceptions such as small ensemble performance like the form, rules, and practiced moves of a game jazz and Indian classical music exist) [Wide tunings; Loud volume; Buzzy timbres] [Narrow tunings; Wide dynamic range; Broad timbral range] Turino, T. (2008). Music as social life : the politics of participation . London: University of Chicago Press.

For Turino (2008, p48), "The style characteristics of participatory music create security in constancy and a cloaking of individual contributions which, in turn, create comfort for participants. These sound features have evolved dialectically in relation to the particular goals and value of inclusion. Participatory sound style actually functions to inspire people to join in, and this type of music making serves a deeper function of creating a special sense of social synchrony, bonding, and identity. Finally, in societies where participatory music is the most valued form, almost everyone will grow up taking part in music and dance and develop some competence; music and dance will be available to everyone as normal human activities."