Cycle — where it appears
Named by 15 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
Rhythm is a circle, and the bar line is a choice
Draw a rhythm as a line and it looks like a sequence of decisions. Draw it as a cycle and the same pattern turns out to be shared across continents, differing only in where somebody decided to start counting.
A cycle cannot cadence
Every component of closure is defined by a first time and a last time. Music built on a repeating cycle has neither, so the whole apparatus returns zero on it — not a small value, zero, at every setting. What such music uses instead is how many things are playing, and that is a curve which can be computed from the onsets and nothing else.
A process that enumerates its own form
Take a twelve-step pattern, play it against itself, and move one copy along by one step at a time. The piece is over when the copy returns to where it started, so its length is twelve — arithmetic, not a decision. What is heard at each stage is the union of the two parts, and nobody composed any of it.
The same algorithm made a Cuban rhythm
Ask Bjorklund's algorithm for seven onsets in twelve steps and it returns 101101011010, which read as pitch classes is the natural minor scale. That function has been producing the tresillo and the cinquillo here from the beginning, and nobody has said that the scale field's central object comes out of it unchanged.
Repetition buys least where it is needed most
Every locating figure so far is a listener arriving — the uncertainty averaged over the first cycle heard. Cyclic music comes round dozens of times, and the same model already carries the answer for a listener who has settled: a floor of uncertainty that nothing had read. At two seconds a cycle the repetitions close the whole gap. At sixty they close eight per cent for a single timeline and twelve for a layered code. A slow cycle is worse on the first hearing and gains less from the second, and the two disadvantages compound.
An expectation cannot rescue a cycle too slow to time
A listener who knows a piece arrives with an expectation of where in the cycle they are, and the size of that expectation was the number the last essay said nobody had. It can be given one: a listener who has been timing the cycle carries a spread of their Weber fraction times the cycle, which is the same number of steps at any tempo. Timed to ten per cent, a forty-second cycle would be placed better than a newcomer places a two-second one. But forty seconds is judged in the band where the Weber fraction is nearer forty per cent, and there the expectation is worth a tenth of a bit.
The strokes between the gongs are a clock
An experienced listener arriving in a forty-second gong cycle was expected to be no better placed than a newcomer, because a whole cycle is timed in the band where a Weber fraction is near forty per cent. But nobody times a gong cycle as one interval. A listener who resets at the last gong, the last kempul and the last kenong times three short intervals instead of one long one, and arrives knowing their position to a tenth of a bit — better than a listener timing the whole cycle to ten per cent. A single timeline, whose strokes are all one instrument, offers nothing to reset on.
The best gong cycle halves at every level
A colotomic cycle is a clock whose layers are its hands, and a clock can be built many ways from the same number of strokes. Searched over every nesting of a sixteen-step cycle, the one that places a slow listener best is, at every budget of strokes, the one in which each layer is exactly twice as fast as the layer above it. A gong with one other layer does best at a ratio of four, and three halving layers with the same four strokes beat it by a factor of three and a half. A layer finer than the one whose interval is already timed to half a step adds almost nothing.
An elaboration is a clock hand where the skeleton has none
A colotomic cycle is a clock whose hands are its punctuating layers, and the finest hand a slow cycle can use runs out as the cycle slows. The elaborating parts that fill the cycle were predicted to supply that finer hand. They can, and a two-step figure recognised at every boundary is a kethuk exactly. But the figure that does most is not a fine one. It is a long one with a single recognisable point in the middle of the cycle, where no skeleton stroke falls: at eighty seconds a cycle it leaves a listener a fifth as uncertain as the skeleton alone, where a kethuk takes off a tenth — and it still does more than a kethuk when a listener catches that point one time in ten.
Two landmarks in a cycle help only if they can be told apart
One recognisable point inside a slow gong cycle, placed where the skeleton has no stroke, did more for a listener than a whole layer of kethuk strokes. A second point does as much again, a third nearly as much again — provided the listener can tell which point they have just heard. If the points sound alike, a second one is worth a fraction of that, seventy of the hundred and five ways of placing it leave the listener worse off than one point would, and two alike points half a cycle apart undo most of what the first one gave. Whether the listener keeps one timer or several turns out not to matter at all.
A gamelan's beating names its goal only if each goal beats at its own rate
When a gamelan's elaborating parts reach a goal tone early, a pair of instruments tuned slightly apart beats on that degree for the strokes before the goal — a swell of shimmer just before each structural stroke, which is exactly where a recognisable event does a slow cycle's clock most good. Whether it does that good depends on whether one goal's swell can be told from another's. Tune every pair to the same beat rate, the practice that keeps a gamelan's shimmer even, and every swell is the same event: it buys a third of what it could. Tune every pair the same number of cents apart and each degree beats at its own rate, fifteen per cent faster than the degree below, and the swells start naming which goal is coming.
A gamelan tuner can name the goals for nothing
A pair tuned so that each goal beats at its own rate lets the swells before a gamelan's structural strokes say which goal is coming, and the question left was what that costs in roughness. Held at the same average shimmer, nothing: a constant interval adds one per cent less roughness than an even beat rate, and a rate rising as the square of the pitch adds three per cent less while naming the goals for a far coarser ear. The even shimmer puts its widest pairs on the low degrees, where a cent of detuning costs most.
A goal tone that returns should swell only once
When two of a gamelan cycle's four goal strokes land on the same degree, their swells of beating sound alike, and a listener who hears one cannot tell which goal is coming. Across all 625 ways five degrees can fill four goals, 365 are served better by an elaboration that anticipates fewer goals than four. The repeated pair costs most at slow cycles, can cost more than every swell is worth at moderate ones, and is spared only when its first swell comes straight after the gong.
A newcomer learns a cycle's landmarks in four hearings
Two recognisable points in a slow gong cycle help a listener only if they can be told apart, and a newcomer at first cannot: two marks that differ only by where they fall in the cycle sound alike until the listener has heard enough cycles to notice. Timed from the gong, the best pair of points is learned by nine listeners in ten after about four cycles — the same four at any slow tempo, so ten minutes at 160 seconds a cycle. The pairs learned fastest sit right after the gong and are poor clocks once learned; for the first four cycles a newcomer is best served not by the best clock but by a pair whose confusion costs less while it lasts.
More marks are worse until they sound different
Two points in a slow gong cycle take a newcomer four hearings to tell apart, and the obvious way to shorten that is to make them sound unlike each other. For two marks it barely matters: the saving is a sixth, the first hearing is lost whatever they sound like, and the best pair stays the best pair. The surprise is what happens to more than two. Marks told apart by position alone are worse the more of them there are, for dozens of cycles. Past a very small difference of sound, four marks beat two inside the first four hearings.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
InformationMemory decayWeber fractionTimelineDurationBeatingOnset patternRotationSlendroDetuningEntrainmentEuclidean rhythm