Concept

Cadence — where it appears

A pair of chords at the end of a phrase, named for which of the signals of closure it supplies and which it withholds. Closure is several independent things at once, so a cadence is better read as a bundle of cues than as a single event.

Named by 24 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The seven chords of a key, by distance from home. Each triad of the major scale placed at a radius equal to how far its voices must move from the tonic chord. The chords that feel closest to home are the ones that are closest, in the plain arithmetic sense.

A progression is a path, and the map can be drawn

Chords in a key are not a list. They sit at measurable distances from home, and a progression is a walk across that space — which explains why some sequences feel like journeys and others like wandering.

harmony · Progression
Two ways to fill eight bars, and only one of them accelerates. The period against the sentence, drawn as the lengths of their constituent units against position on a grid of eight bars. The ratio beside each row is the mean unit length in its second half divided by the mean in its first: the period at 1.00, the sentence at 0.67. A ratio below one is an acceleration — the unit shortening as the phrase approaches its arrival — and a ratio of one is a plan whose unit never changes length.

One of these eight-bar phrases accelerates

The sentence and the period both occupy eight bars, both end with a cadence, and both are recognised by ear rather than counted. What separates them is arithmetic. One halves its unit halfway through and the other does not, and the difference comes out as a single ratio — 0.67 against 1.00 — computed from nothing but the lengths of the parts.

form · Phrase
Five signals, computed separately, and no total. The five components of closure for 6 chord pairs. The first three are computed from the chords alone; the last two are properties of where the goal lands and how long it is held. There is no total column: the components are not commensurable and the ordering of these cadences depends on which is weighted.

What makes an ending an ending

Cadences are ranked. The authentic one is strong, the plagal weaker, the deceptive weaker still — and the solver here measured the quantity that ranking is usually explained by and found it says something else entirely. What survives is not a weaker version of the ranking but a different kind of object, with five components and no total.

form · Closure
Five signals, computed separately, and no total. The five components of closure for 4 chord pairs. The first three are computed from the chords alone; the last two are properties of where the goal lands and how long it is held. There is no total column: the components are not commensurable and the ordering of these cadences depends on which is weighted.

An ending that exists so a bigger one can

Half of the cadences in tonal music are built to fail. A phrase that stopped convincingly at bar four would be a piece four bars long, so the ending at bar four is engineered to arrive and not to settle — and the components it withholds are exactly the ones its partner at bar eight supplies. Closure is nested, and the nesting is what turns two phrases into one thing.

form · Closure
How surprising each chord is, in bits. Each step's information content, −log₂ of the probability the root-motion weights used here give it. a perfect cadence totals 6.4 bits over 3 steps; a deceptive cadence totals 7.3 bits over 3 steps; I – IV – V – vi totals 7.3 bits over 3 steps. The single most surprising move drawn is IV to V at 2.7 bits, which is 42 per cent of everything its passage spends. The eight weights are ordinal and stipulated rather than counted, so these are the numbers that ordering implies and not a measurement of any repertoire.

The chord that did not come

A deceptive cadence is described as a surprise, and the explanation offered is that the wrong chord arrived. Measured against the tonal hierarchy already in use, the wrong chord is the second best-fitting triad in the key — and two of its three voices do exactly what they would have done in the right one. The surprise is not statistical. It is one voice, and it is the bass.

harmony · Tonal-expectation
thirty-two-bar AABA, as a strip of time. thirty-two-bar AABA laid out one cell per bar, coloured by section, with the roman numeral in each bar. the A section's turnaround is the ii-V every variant keeps; the bridge is a chain of applied dominants. At 108 beats a minute in 4/4 the whole of it lasts 71 seconds. Cut into 4 repeat units of 8 bars, 3 pairs of units agree on more than 50 per cent of their bars. 2 of them are not identical, and 2 of those 2 differ in a run of bars ending at the last bar of the unit; the changed bars are marked in orange.

Where a repeat is changed

Cut every scheme into its own repeat unit, compare each unit with every other, and ask where a repeat stops agreeing with what it repeats. The answer is that it stops at the end, in every case the corpus contains — and the number of cases the corpus contains depends entirely on where the threshold for "a repeat" is put. Moving it by nothing at all takes the count from two to twenty and the finding with it.

form · Repetition
Every triad, by how far it is from G7. All 24 chords ranked by the smallest total motion that takes G7 onto each, every note of the target sounded and one voice doubled where the sizes differ. The spread is narrow — 2 semitones at the nearest and 6 at the furthest — and the ranking is flat in the middle: 12 chords tie at four semitones.

The resolution the metric cannot find

Rank every triad by how far its voices are from the dominant seventh and the tonic is not at the minimum. It sits in a twelve-way tie in the middle, the chord a deceptive cadence goes to is the furthest away of all twenty-four, and the two nearest are chords no cadence ever uses. What selects the two resolutions is not a distance — it is a direction, and it picks out exactly two triads from the twenty-four.

harmony · Voice-leading
The thirteen intervals at C4, ordered by roughness, against Fux's species, 1725. Every interval within an octave above 262 Hz, ordered by the Plomp–Levelt roughness of a string spectrum — from 0.0029 for the unison to 0.2635 for the minor second — beside whether Fux's species, 1725 counts it a consonance and how many of the thirteen may follow it under that rule set. The best single threshold on roughness misclassifies 2 of the thirteen, among them the major third and the minor third, and the gap it falls in is 4.2 per cent of the roughness either side of it.

A dissonance is what has to be resolved

The perfect fourth is a consonance between two upper voices and a dissonance against the bass, and the same three notes are involved either way. Score both arrangements with the roughness model and the one the rules call a dissonance comes out thirty per cent smoother. Whatever the rule is tracking, it is not the sound.

harmony · Consonance
The triad on every degree of every rotation. The quality of the triad built on each degree of each rotation, computed from the set rather than tabulated. The triad on the fifth degree is major in 3 of the 7: Lydian, Ionian, Locrian. Of those, Locrian has no triad on its own first degree to resolve to, and Lydian has its fifth degree on the note the parent collection is built from, so the cadence would confirm the parent rather than the mode. What is left is Ionian — one rotation of the 7, and the others have to end some other way.

One dominant among seven

The triad on the fifth degree is major in three of the seven rotations. One of those three has no triad on its own first degree, and one has its fifth degree on the note the parent collection is built from — so exactly one rotation of the seven has a dominant, and the other six end by moves that cost twice as much in voice leading.

harmony · Modes
Every voicing of a second-inversion major triad, least rough first. All 27 arrangements of the same three pitch classes within 3 octaves from 131 Hz, scored for roughness. The best is spaced 19 then 9 semitones — wide below, close above — and the worst is the chord in close position at the bottom of the range, 7.6 times rougher with exactly the same notes in it.

The inversion that cannot end a phrase

Three positions of one triad, three measurements, and the practice contradicted at every turn. The second inversion is the smoothest of the three by roughness, the best explained of the three by a virtual-pitch model, and the one that three centuries of practice will not let a phrase end on. What forbids it is a rule about a two-voice skeleton.

intervals · The triad
Three ways to arrive at the same final tempo. Tempo against position in the closing passage, ending at 35 per cent of the opening tempo, for curvature exponents 1, 2, 3. All three begin and end at the same tempo, so what separates them is the middle: at the halfway point they read 68 per cent for linear in score position, 75 per cent for constant deceleration, 80 per cent for q = 3. The straight line is the one nobody plays. Measured ritardandos fit the decelerating curves, which is the whole of Kronman and Sundberg's argument: a closing gesture has the shape of a body stopping rather than of a dial being turned, and the parameter that varies between performances is the final tempo rather than the shape.

An ending is a deceleration

Every performance slows down at the end and the slowing has a shape. Tempo read against score position is the velocity of a body stopping — a square root rather than a straight line — and the three candidate curves agree at both ends by construction, so the whole audible difference is in the middle, where they part by fifteen per cent of the passage's length.

form · Closure
The boundary operator run over only what has been heard. Foote's checkerboard novelty on thirty-two-bar AABA at a kernel width of 4 bars, computed twice: once with the whole piece available, and once using only the bars heard up to and including each bar. The kernel reaches 4 bars forward, so every cell it needs has been heard 3 bars after its centre — the retrospective curve replotted 3 bars to the right lands on the causal one, and the operator turns out to be causal at a fixed delay rather than blind. The dashed verticals are the encoding's real section boundaries and are not an input.

An ending that can be heard coming

Two measurements are both called hearing an ending coming and they point in opposite directions. By the halfway mark of an ordinary form almost nothing new arrives — and the cost of coding each bar has not fallen at all. Neither statistic says anything is about to stop, because no statistic over content can: predicting the next event well is not predicting that there will not be one.

form · Closure
The test a histogram cannot pass. Two passages built from the same two keys: one takes them in turn and the other sounds them together. Over a window long enough to hold both, their pitch-class histograms are 98.6 per cent alike, so they are very nearly the same object to a profile model — and it names two keys in both. The ordered model names up to four for the alternation and one for the simultaneity, because a simultaneity has no sequence in it that any single key's grammar will not fit.

A key-finder that keeps the order

Every key-finding model until now begins by throwing order away — a histogram over a window, correlated against twenty-four profiles — and the thing that most obviously declares a key is an ordered pair of chords. A model that keeps the order costs 84 states and 7,056 transitions against 24 hypotheses and none, and what it buys is the one test a histogram was said not to pass: two keys in turn and two keys at once have histograms 98 per cent alike, and are two different sequences.

harmony · Key-relations
Two passages, one note apart, and opposite cadences. Two passages that share eight bars drawn from the six pitch classes C major and G major have in common, and differ only in their last three bars: one cadences in C and one in G, and the single note that separates them is an F against an F sharp. The cadence evidence names C for the first and G for the second, by 9 to 3 and 6 to 4. The profile model names E minor for both, with correlations differing in the third decimal.

The cadence as evidence

Every model so far infers a key from a bag of notes, and the thing that most obviously declares a key is a cadence — an ordered pair of chords in which the order is the whole content. The essays on closure built a five-component cadence vector long before this and nobody has used it for this. Two passages differing in one note, one cadencing in C and one in G, get opposite answers from the ordered pairs and the same answer from the profile.

harmony · Progression
Four endings, and the loudness each produces from the page alone. Short-term loudness through the closing 6 bars of a thirty-two bar scheme, computed from the part count of each bar with no performance data of any kind — the parts are realised every way their ranges allow, every partial is placed in its critical band, and the sum is run through the two loudness smoothers. thins to one arrives at 0.764 of the running impression; full final chord arrives at 0.952 of the running impression; unchanged arrives at 1.000 of the running impression; thins then full arrives at 0.929 of the running impression. The result worth the figure is that full final chord is not the loudest: adding parts to a final chord adds power and almost no loudness, because the extra parts land in critical bands the chord already occupies. An ending is made loud by contrast with what preceded it, not by thickness.

A final chord is not made loud by adding to it

An earlier essay on closure said the loudest cue an ending has needs a corpus rather than an arithmetic. The arithmetic was built one essay ago, so it does not. Run four ending textures through it and two things come out backwards: a final chord three parts thicker than the rest arrives *quieter* against the running impression than the passage it ends, and a texture that drops a part a bar does not get quieter at all until the bar where there is one part left.

form · Closure
Two kinds of evidence, each measured against its own chance. Every key as a point: across, how many standard deviations its cadence count is above what the same bars resampled would give; up, the same for its pitch-class profile correlation. The winner on cadences is key C at 6.2 standard deviations and on profile C at 1.1, and they agree. Standard deviations above chance are the same unit whatever produced them, which is the commensuration this figure is for — and it costs something: it assumes the two chances are equally interesting, which is a weighting in disguise. The obvious null does not work at all for one of the two: shuffling the bars leaves a pitch-class histogram exactly as it was, so its spread is zero and every key scores nothing against it.

A count and a correlation

Cadence evidence is a count of ordered pairs and profile evidence is a correlation with a template, and the cadence essay refused to total them because they are not in the same units. Score each against its own chance and they are — standard deviations above chance are the same unit whatever produced them. Then the trouble moves: the obvious null does nothing at all to one of the two, because shuffling the bars leaves a pitch-class histogram exactly as it was.

harmony · Progression
How surprising each chord is, in bits. Each step's information content, −log₂ of the probability the root-motion weights used here give it. a perfect cadence totals 6.4 bits over 3 steps; a deceptive cadence totals 7.3 bits over 3 steps; I – IV – V – vi totals 7.3 bits over 3 steps. The single most surprising move drawn is IV to V at 2.7 bits, which is 42 per cent of everything its passage spends. The eight weights are ordinal and stipulated rather than counted, so these are the numbers that ordering implies and not a measurement of any repertoire.

Surprise is a number

The chord that did not come was described rather than measured. Its measure is the information content of what did arrive, and a model of the probability has been to hand since the key-finding essays — eight root-motion weights, ordinal and stipulated. Reading them as a distribution prices a deceptive cadence at 2.71 bits against a perfect one's 1.85, and turns up the fact that the largest of the eight had never been read by anything.

harmony · Tonal-expectation
The tempo turns, and almost nothing moves. The earlier arrival reading — what is sounding at the final chord over what the listener has been hearing — swept over bar lengths from 0.5 to 5 seconds, which is 480 down to 48 beats a minute, at 3 closing lengths. Every curve is nearly flat. Across a tenfold change of tempo one gesture's reading moves by a factor of 1.201 and the other's by 1.098, while the gap between the two gestures — which is what that essay was measuring — is 1.228. The expectation was that the tempo would decide the answer, on the grounds that a two-second bar against a two-second release is a comparable pair. The premise is wrong in a way the sweep makes obvious: the thing being compared with the release is not a bar, it is the WHOLE ENDING, which is 2 to 8 bars long and is therefore far longer than the release at every tempo anybody plays. The running impression has caught up with the closing texture before the final chord arrives, at 0.5 seconds a bar and at 5, and what is left is the last bar's own jump.

The parameter that did not decide the answer

An earlier essay on closure ended by naming the tempo as the thing every number in it was resting on, and said it was the kind of parameter that had caused trouble before by turning out to decide the answer. Turned across a tenfold range at a closing gesture of fixed length it moves the reading by four per cent, against a twenty-three per cent gap between the gestures it is distinguishing. The parameter beside it in the same figure — how many bars the gesture occupies — moves it by twenty, and nobody had named that one at all.

form · Closure
The surprise of each chord, against the uncertainty it arrived into. The information content of each step — minus the log of its probability under a distribution that multiplies the root-motion weight by how well the destination triad's notes fit the key — with the entropy of the moment before it drawn behind. I – IV – V – I: I→IV 1.71 bits, IV→V 2.80 bits, V→I 1.60 bits, against a mean uncertainty of 2.63; I – IV – V – vi: I→IV 1.71 bits, IV→V 2.80 bits, V→vi 2.61 bits, against a mean uncertainty of 2.63. A surprise larger than the entropy it arrived into is an outcome the model was not expecting even given how uncertain it was; one below it is an outcome the model had already mostly bet on. An earlier essay produced the first of those numbers and had no way to produce the second, because a set of preferences is not a distribution and only a distribution has an entropy.

A chord, given a key and a predecessor

A chord's improbability has been priced from its root motion alone, which left one multiplication unmade: a chord is also improbable because its notes do not fit the key, and that number has been available since the probe-tone profile. Multiplied and renormalised, the two give a conditional distribution — and a distribution has an entropy, which is the quantity a surprise has to be read against and which a list of preferences cannot supply.

harmony · Tonal-expectation
The passage built so the two statistics disagree. A body of chords diatonic to C major, of growing length, ended by a ii–V–I in G. The bag of notes says one key and the ordered pair says the other, which is the case the earlier figures never contained. The line is the cadence evidence for G, and under the axis is what each reading actually names at each length. The cadence reading holds G up to a body of 6 bars and is overturned at 8, so one explicit cadence is worth about that many bars of profile evidence — and it is overturned by the body's OWN incidental root motions rather than by the histogram at all. That is the finding the earlier essay could not have: on real material the two statistics cannot be varied independently, because lengthening the profile evidence adds cadence evidence too, for a third key.

The passage built to make them disagree

A cadence count and a key-profile correlation have been put on one scale and run on a passage where the two agree, which tells nobody anything. Building one where they disagree — the notes of one key and the cadences of another — measures the exchange rate at about six bars per cadence, and finds something the agreement case concealed: the two statistics cannot be varied independently, because lengthening the profile evidence adds cadence evidence too, for a third key.

harmony · Progression
A ritardando does not spend the diminuendo. The arrival reading under a deceleration into the ending, from no ritardando at all to a final tempo 30 per cent of the starting one — which stretches the closing bars from 12.0 seconds to 20.2. The expectation was that it would matter: a ritardando lengthens exactly the bars the gesture is happening in, so a diminuendo that would have been absorbed at a steady tempo gets more of the smoother's own time to be absorbed in. It moves the reading by 0.00 per cent. Every line here is flat to within the thickness of the line, which is the second time a tempo parameter has been swept here and found to do nothing.

The reading was a step response

Sweeping the tempo found it did not decide the answer. This one sweeps the deceleration across a factor of three and finds a null to five figures, and then sweeps the length of the closing gesture across a factor of forty-eight and finds it moves the reading by eight per cent — but not as a function of seconds. Sorted by seconds the twelve runs scatter; sorted by how many bars the instruction covers they fall into three tight groups. One sentence explains the null and the not-null together.

form · Closure
A rest is a diminuendo, and a long one. How far a listener's running impression of loudness falls during a silence, converted into the diminuendo that would have taken it the same distance. Half a second of nothing is worth 3.2 decibels, a second and a bit is worth 8.1, and two and a half seconds is worth 17. The marked line is three and a half seconds, which is where a gap starts to be heard as an ending rather than as a pause: at that length the reference has fallen by 24 decibels, which is more than a fortissimo to a pianissimo. A tempo swept over a factor of ten, a deceleration over a factor of three and a gesture length over a factor of forty-eight all returned the same reading to four significant figures. This one moves it by twenty-four decibels.

A rest is a diminuendo

Three parameters swept over factors of ten, three and forty-eight returned the same reading to four significant figures. The one manipulation left unswept moves it by twenty-four decibels: a silence. A listener's running impression decays at the loudness smoother's two-second release, so a general pause is a diminuendo nobody wrote, and at the length that makes a gap an ending it is worth more than any marking a composer has.

form · Closure
Which bars the key is decided by, and which bars it is believed on. Every bar of a 32-bar scheme removed in turn, with what its absence costs. The column is how far the passage's mean margin falls without that bar — how much of the model's certainty it supplies. The dot is how many bars are then read as a different key — how much of the answer it supplies. The 18 bars an analysis would point at — a section opening or closing, a dominant, the chord a dominant resolves to — average 0.079 bits of certainty and 0.50 bars moved; the 14 ordinary bars average 0.047 and 0.07. So the structural bars carry 1.7 times as much certainty as the ordinary ones, and 7.0 times of the answer. Those are different quantities, and the second is the one an analysis is about: an ordinary bar can carry a great deal of a passage's certainty and none of its reading.

The bars a key is made of

A discount that treats every bar alike is the wrong shape for a memory, so take each bar away in turn and see what it was worth. The bars an analysis points at carry seven times as much of the answer as the ordinary ones and slightly less of the certainty — and a memory built only of them reads the passage worse than a memory with no structure in it at all.

harmony · Key-relations
A final chord stands above the impression for a fraction of a second. How far a final chord at the tutti's own level stands above the listener's running impression at the instant it is released, against how long it lasts, for four ways of arriving at it. Straight out of the tutti it stands above nothing at any length; after 1.2 s of silence the impression is 8.1 dB down, and the chord stands highest, 5.14 dB, when it lasts 54 ms; after 3.5 s of silence the impression is 23.7 dB down, and the chord stands highest, 14.42 dB, when it lasts 28 ms; after a 6 dB diminuendo the impression is 5.0 dB down, and the chord stands highest, 3.18 dB, when it lasts 42 ms. Every curve is level again by half a second, because the impression's attack of 99 ms catches the note's attack of 22 ms, so a held chord is released at the impression's level whatever preceded it.

A final chord stands out for a twentieth of a second

A general pause drives a listener's running impression down, and the final chord that follows is supposed to cash the fall in. It cashes in at most two thirds of it. The note's own loudness rises with a 22-millisecond constant and the impression with a 99-millisecond one, so after a bar of silence the chord stands furthest above the impression 54 milliseconds in, by 5.1 of the 8.1 decibels the silence bought, and after 206 milliseconds the two are within a phon of each other. A short stamp spends most of its life standing out; a chord held a second and a half spends a seventh of it.

form · Closure

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

ClosureExpectationTonal functionKey-findingProgressionDynamicsLoudnessLeading noteSegmentationTonal hierarchyVoice-leadingDominant seventh

All concepts