Concept

Harmonic rhythm — where it appears

How often the harmony changes, measured as chord changes a second, and independent of which chords are used. It runs over a factor of thirty between styles, and both of its limits are set by things that are not harmony.

Named by 17 essays across 4 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

How often the chord changes, and what a room allows. Chord changes a second implied by each style's stated rate and tempo, on a logarithmic axis, with the rate above which a room leaves more than one earlier chord above 20 dB marked for six rooms. The style rates are conventions rather than corpus measurements and the figure says so; the room rates are arithmetic from the reverberation time.

How often the chord changes

Two pieces can use the same chords in the same order and be nothing alike, because a progression says which chords and not how fast. Harmonic rhythm is the second variable, it runs over a factor of thirty between the styles that use it, and both of its limits are set by things that are not harmony — a listener's memory at the slow end and a building at the fast one.

harmony · Progression
6 chords in a gothic cathedral. Each chord's reverberant decay in a room with a 8 second reverberation time, at 1 chord a second. Decay is linear in decibels, so each line is straight with a slope of -7.5 dB a second. When a chord arrives, 2 earlier ones are still above 20 dB down.

The room chooses the harmonic rhythm

A chord in a cathedral is still sounding, seven decibels down, when the next one arrives — and the one after that, and the one after that. Reverberation is linear in decibels, so the number of chords audible at once is one number divided by another, and it puts a hard ceiling on how fast a composer writing for that building can change harmony. The ceiling is computable, and the music written for those rooms sits under it.

timbre · Room acoustics
Every delay, scored — a round and a tune that is not one. Mean Plomp-Levelt roughness of the simultaneities a tune makes against a copy of itself entering a whole number of bars later, for Frere Jacques and Twinkle, twinkle. The two do not overlap: the worst delay of the first is smoother than the best delay of the second. The model sees roughness and nothing else — no voice leading, no parallels, no distinction between a passing dissonance and a structural one.

A melody that can accompany itself

Whether a tune works as a round is decidable before anyone sings it. Score every simultaneity it makes against a delayed copy of itself, at every delay, with the roughness model already in use, and two nursery tunes separate completely — every delay of one is smoother than every delay of the other. What the scan does not do is pick out the entry the tradition uses, and that refusal is the most informative thing in it.

harmony · Voice-leading
The same hall, empty and full. A hall of 18700 cubic metres with 900 square metres of audience, designed to 1.9 seconds occupied, with three kinds of seat under the audience. It is 2.76 s empty and 1.90 s full with hard wooden seats, a change of 31 per cent; 2.29 s empty and 1.90 s full with lightly padded, a change of 17 per cent; 1.96 s empty and 1.90 s full with heavily upholstered, a change of 3 per cent. The audience is 45 per cent of the total absorption when the hall is full, which is the largest single term in the equation — and how much the hall changes is decided entirely by what the seats were doing before anybody sat on them.

The model has nobody in it

Sabine's room is an empty box. The audience is 45 per cent of a full hall's absorption, a hall with hard seats goes from 2.76 seconds empty to 1.90 full, and because an audience absorbs far more treble than bass it does not shorten the decay so much as tilt it. And the players are inside the loop the model has no term for at all.

instruments · Room acoustics
The same eight notes, read three ways. The scale, eight quavers, scored against every triad and seventh at every root. Barred as written the best reading is C major7 at 0.850; with the barline one quaver later it is D minor7 at 0.850. With no metre — every note weighted the same — 4 readings tie at 0.625 and the passage has no best analysis at all. The notes are identical in all three. What changed is where the bar starts, which is not a fact about harmony.

Which notes are the chord

A progression is a list of chords, and before there is a list something has to decide which of the notes sounding are chord tones and which are passing. Take the eight notes of a scale as eight quavers and score every triad and seventh at every root: barred as written the best reading is C major seventh, with the barline moved by one quaver it is D minor seventh, and with no metre at all three readings tie exactly and the passage has no best analysis. Same eight notes in all three. Harmonic analysis is a function of a variable that is not harmony.

harmony · Progression
Expectation as a curve, and what a change costs where it lands. Every quantity so far is attached to a chord change: a list of surprises, one per event. A listener's expectation is continuous — it sharpens through a bar and collapses when the change arrives — and the two ingredients for it are already here, the harmonic rhythm and the metrical beat weights. The curve is the hazard: given that the chord has not changed yet, the chance that it changes on this beat. It runs from 0.043 on the weakest beat to 0.290 on the downbeat, a ratio of 6.7, against 0.125 if every beat were alike. The marked beats are where the changes actually arrive, and their timing bill is 3.6 bits against 6.0 for a listener with no metre — so these changes are 1.7 times cheaper to expect than a metreless listener would find them. That term is new: an earlier essay prices which chord arrived and this prices when, and a listener meets the sum.

Expectation is a curve, not a list

Every quantity so far is attached to a chord change: a list of surprises, one per event. A listener's expectation is continuous, sharpening through a bar and collapsing when the change arrives — and the two ingredients for it were already here, in two other accounts. What comes out is a second surprise, for when a chord arrives rather than for which one it is.

harmony · Tonal-expectation
One contrast survives every tempo anybody plays and the other does not. How much of each quantity's contrast between chords a listener still has at the end of each chord, against how long a chord lasts. The roughness curve is flat at one down to 45 milliseconds a chord and then falls off a cliff, because its window is 37 milliseconds and a boxcar either fits inside a chord or does not. The loudness curve is already losing at a second a chord and keeps 83 per cent at the slowest pace here, 39 at the fastest. Nothing in music is faster than the roughness window and a great deal of music is faster than the loudness one, so a passage delivers its dissonance and averages its dynamics.

The dissonance arrives and the dynamic does not

A scoring decides two things at once and both of them have to be integrated by a listener before they exist. The loudness smoother's release is two seconds and the roughness window is thirty-seven milliseconds, and that ratio of fifty decides which of the two survives at the pace music is actually played. Nothing anybody performs is fast enough to blur a dissonance, and a great deal of it is fast enough to average a dynamic.

form · Orchestration
The number nobody has moves the size and not the order. The mean total surprise per chord change, against how much the two surprises share. At zero they are independent and the total is their sum; at one they are the same event and the total is the larger of the two. The mean falls by a factor of 1.53 across that whole range, which is the size of the thing a corpus would settle. The ordering of the events by total surprise does not move at all until the very end: 5 of the 6 correlations swept give exactly the ordering independence gives, and only perfect dependence changes it, by 3 places out of 7. The most surprising event in the passage is the same one at every correlation. So the corpus three separate accounts have recorded wanting would change what this figure reports and not what it concludes.

Two surprises and one event

A chord change is surprising twice over — in which chord it is, and in when it comes — and a listener meets one event. Adding two surprises needs to know how much they share, which is a fact about a repertoire nobody has. Sweeping it instead: the total moves by half, the ordering does not move at all, and the most surprising moment in a passage is the same one whatever the answer turns out to be.

harmony · Tonal-expectation
A third of the timing surprise is paid for by nothing happening. Every beat of a bar of 4/4 at 1 chord change a bar, with what it costs a listener in expectation. The lower block is the arrival — the chance the chord changes here times what that change costs to be surprised by. The upper block is the hold, which is paid when the chord does not change and is charged at every beat rather than at every event. Over the bar the arrivals come to 2.61 bits and the non-arrivals to 1.29, so the term never spent before is 33 per cent of the total rather than most of it. The two together are exactly the binary entropy of each beat's own hazard, which is why the bar's whole timing bill is 3.90 bits and cannot be raised by rearranging where the changes fall.

The surprise of nothing happening

A hazard charges a listener twice — once when the chord changes and once, quietly, at every beat it does not. The second term was expected to dominate, because there are more beats than changes. It is a third of the bill at one chord a bar and never reaches a half at any rate a metre survives, because the cost of a beat where nothing happens is second-order small.

harmony · Tonal-expectation
What a chord change costs where it actually lands. Every beat of a bar of 4/4 at 1 change a bar, priced as a listener meets it: the pale block is what has already been paid waiting through the beats the chord did not come on, and the dark block is the arrival itself. Their sum is what it costs to be surprised by a change here. The last column is the remaining case, never priced before: no change in the bar at all, at 1.61 bits and a probability of 0.33. The 9 costs are a proper distribution — 1.000 — which is the check that this is one model rather than two. And the spread is the finding: the arrival term alone puts a factor of 6.7 between the best and worst beat, and counting the waiting makes it 19.

Where the chord actually lands

Every timing surprise so far is evaluated on a downbeat: the curve spans a factor of 6.7 and every number is read at its peak. Charge the waiting as well as the arrival and the costs over a bar become a proper distribution, the spread between the best and worst beat rises to a factor of 19.5, and a third of the probability sits on a bar in which nothing changes at all.

harmony · Tonal-expectation
How often the metre, the chords and their product find the barline, chords at 1. Constructed passages of four bars of eight quavers, 100 at each setting, with the barline at the first slot. Rhythm regularity is how much likelier a note is on a strong slot than a weak one; chord regularity is how much likelier a note is to be a tone of its bar's chord than a random scale tone. rhythm 0: metre finds it 10%, chords find it 41%, product finds it 16%; rhythm 0.25: metre finds it 34%, chords find it 35%, product finds it 56%; rhythm 0.5: metre finds it 49%, chords find it 21%, product finds it 66%; rhythm 0.75: metre finds it 50%, chords find it 17%, product finds it 56%; rhythm 1: metre finds it 50%, chords find it 11%, product finds it 45%.

The chords never move the barline

Every hypothesis the joint search had drawn was one bar long, and on one bar with a note in every slot the metre cannot choose a barline at all. Four bars with rests in them make the barline a decision the metre and the chords both have an opinion about, and the prediction was that the chords would move the barline more often than the barline moves the chords. It is the other way round, completely: whenever the two prefer different barlines the search takes the metre's, on up to 72 per cent of passages, and in fifteen hundred passages the chords never once move it. What the chords decide is the one thing the metre cannot see — whether the bar starts on the downbeat or half a bar later — and they decide it right a little over two times in three at best.

harmony · Progression
The product and the sum of standard scores, finding the barline, chords at 1. Constructed passages of four bars of eight quavers, 100 at each setting, with the barline at the first slot. Rhythm regularity is how much likelier a note is on a strong slot than a weak one; chord regularity is how much likelier a note is to be a tone of its bar's chord than a random scale tone. rhythm 0: product finds it 16%, sum of z finds it 22%, metre finds it 10%, chords, z 35%; rhythm 0.25: product finds it 56%, sum of z finds it 58%, metre finds it 34%, chords, z 38%; rhythm 0.5: product finds it 66%, sum of z finds it 61%, metre finds it 49%, chords, z 19%; rhythm 0.75: product finds it 56%, sum of z finds it 58%, metre finds it 50%, chords, z 14%; rhythm 1: product finds it 45%, sum of z finds it 48%, metre finds it 50%, chords, z 12%.

The chords are a weak witness to the barline

Scaled by its own range, the metre overrules the chords every time the two disagree about where a bar begins. The obvious repair is to score each reading against its own chance — the metre against the same number of notes placed at random, the chords against the passage's notes shuffled across its bars — and add the standard scores. It changes very little: the search finds the barline within six points of where the product found it, and the chords gain the power to move the barline only on passages whose rhythm says nothing, where random notes move it nearly as often. The null's real result is the size of the two witnesses. At the written barline the metre stands up to 5.9 standard deviations above chance, and the chords, with every note a tone of its bar's chord, stand 1.55 above it at best.

harmony · Progression
Four bars read by where the chords change, barline by barline. A constructed passage of four bars of eight quavers, its barline at the first slot and its chords C, F, Em, Dm. Notes: slot 1 C, slot 3 E, slot 4 G, slot 5 E, slot 6 C, slot 9 C, slot 10 C, slot 11 F, slot 13 A, slot 16 C, slot 17 B, slot 19 B, slot 20 E, slot 21 E, slot 24 G, slot 25 F, slot 29 F. For each of the eight places the barline could fall: as written metre, z 3.97, chords, z 2.00, change, z 4.30, metre + change, z 8.27; 1 quaver late metre, z -2.45, chords, z 2.14, change, z -0.87, metre + change, z -3.32; 2 quavers late metre, z -1.38, chords, z 2.15, change, z -0.54, metre + change, z -1.93; 3 quavers late metre, z -0.31, chords, z -0.27, change, z -2.64, metre + change, z -2.95; 4 quavers late metre, z 3.97, chords, z -1.63, change, z -4.30, metre + change, z -0.33; 5 quavers late metre, z -2.45, chords, z 1.27, change, z 0.87, metre + change, z -1.58; 6 quavers late metre, z -1.38, chords, z 1.18, change, z 0.54, metre + change, z -0.84; 7 quavers late metre, z -0.31, chords, z 1.05, change, z 2.64, metre + change, z 2.32. Best metre, z: as written and 4 late. Best chords, z: 2 late. Best change, z: as written. Best metre + change, z: as written.

The chords mark the barline by changing there

Read bar by bar, the chords stood barely above chance at the barline and broke the metre's half-bar tie two times in three at best. Read instead by where they change — how different the chords are across a candidate's barlines against how different they are across the middle of its bars — the same notes break the tie right on 81 to 96 per cent of passages, and added to the metre they find the barline on up to 89 per cent against 61. The weakness was the question the old reading asked, not the harmony.

harmony · Progression
The change reading follows the chords, not the bar. How far above the other candidates the true barline stands, in standard units, for the reading that scores how much the pitch-class content changes at each candidate — at three harmonic rhythms. At 2 chords a bar the margin is 0.12 and the reading finds the barline 12 per cent of the time; At 1 chord a bar the margin is 1.66 and the reading finds the barline 42 per cent of the time; At a chord every two bars the margin is 0.47 and the reading finds the barline 27 per cent of the time, against a chance rate of 13 per cent. The passages read earlier all changed chord once a bar, which is the middle column and the only one where the reading has anything. Two chords a bar puts a change at the half-bar as well and the reading cannot tell the two apart; a chord every two bars leaves half the barlines with no change at all and the margin halves exactly.

The change reading follows the chords, not the bar

Every passage read until now changes chord exactly at the barline, which is the one harmonic rhythm at which 'the chords change here' and 'the bar starts here' are the same sentence. Pull them apart and the reading goes with the chords: at one chord a bar it stands 1.52 standard units above the other candidates and finds the barline half the time, at two chords a bar it stands 0.01 above them and is at chance, and at a chord every two bars its margin is exactly half — because half the barlines then carry no change at all.

harmony · Progression
Asked for the rate, it answers a multiple of it. The change reading asked its own question — what period do the chords change at — over passages built at three harmonic rhythms, with its standardised score for each candidate period. Given 2 chords a bar it recovers the rate 33 per cent of the time and answers too slow 65; Given 1 chord a bar it recovers the rate 58 per cent of the time and answers too slow 38; Given a chord every two bars it recovers the rate 93 per cent of the time and answers too slow 0. It never errs fast in the way it errs slow, and the reason is structural: a chord change every four slots also produces a change at every eighth slot, so a slower grid inherits a faster rate's evidence and a faster grid cannot inherit a slower one's. That ambiguity is why the reading looked like a barline detector in the first place — the bar is a multiple of every harmonic rhythm that fits inside it.

Asked for the rate, it answers a multiple

A reading that follows the chord rate rather than the bar can be asked what the rate is, and the shape of its errors is the whole of why it looked like a barline detector. Given two chords a bar it returns the right period a third of the time and something slower two thirds; given a chord every two bars it is right nine times in ten. It errs slow and essentially never fast, because a change every four slots also falls on every eighth slot and a slower grid inherits a faster rate's evidence — which is the same asymmetry that makes a pitch detector report an octave too low.

harmony · Progression
The content errs slow and the bass errs fast. Passages of eight bars built at three harmonic rhythms, each with a bass that states every new chord's root and moves to another chord tone on a beat 50 per cent of the time. Two readings are asked the chord rate: one from how much the pitch-class content changes across a grid, one from how completely the bass's moves land on it. At two chords a bar the content reading names the rate 63 per cent of the time, too fast 0 and too slow 37; the bass reading 100, 0 and 0. At one chord a bar the content reading names the rate 67 per cent of the time, too fast 0 and too slow 33; the bass reading 18, 80 and 2. At a chord every two bars the content reading names the rate 98 per cent of the time, too fast 2 and too slow 0; the bass reading 0, 100 and 0. The two readings miss in opposite directions and at opposite ends of the tempo range: the content reading at fast harmonic rhythms, by naming a multiple, and the bass reading at slow ones, by naming its own arpeggiation.

The bass errs fast where the content errs slow

Asked how often the chords change, a reading built on pitch-class content names a slower multiple and never a faster rate. Give the passage a bass that states each new root and moves between chord tones inside a chord, and a reading built on the bass's moves errs the other way: it names a faster grid and never a slower one. At two chords a bar the bass is right every time; at a chord every two bars it is never right. Six ways of combining the two readings each trade one end of the range for the other.

harmony · Progression
Holding the bass through one mid-bar change in six finds the barline five times in six. Passages of eight bars at two chords a bar, with the bass arpeggiating on 50 per cent of its beats, and each barline reading's share of passages it places correctly, against the share of mid-bar chord changes voiced over the bass already sounding. 0% held (convention strength 0): metre then bass 50%, bass alone 13%, metre alone 50%, chord changes alone 10%; 4% held (convention strength 0.1): metre then bass 62%, bass alone 34%, metre alone 50%, chord changes alone 10%; 6% held (convention strength 0.2): metre then bass 68%, bass alone 44%, metre alone 50%, chord changes alone 15%; 9% held (convention strength 0.3): metre then bass 75%, bass alone 57%, metre alone 50%, chord changes alone 18%; 15% held (convention strength 0.4): metre then bass 82%, bass alone 68%, metre alone 50%, chord changes alone 13%; 16% held (convention strength 0.5): metre then bass 85%, bass alone 74%, metre alone 50%, chord changes alone 14%; 20% held (convention strength 0.6): metre then bass 88%, bass alone 79%, metre alone 50%, chord changes alone 11%; 26% held (convention strength 0.7): metre then bass 92%, bass alone 86%, metre alone 50%, chord changes alone 13%; 27% held (convention strength 0.8): metre then bass 92%, bass alone 86%, metre alone 50%, chord changes alone 13%; 28% held (convention strength 0.9): metre then bass 95%, bass alone 92%, metre alone 50%, chord changes alone 10%; 33% held (convention strength 1): metre then bass 96%, bass alone 93%, metre alone 50%, chord changes alone 10%. The metre ties the barline with the half-bar and the chord changes are at chance, since the chords change at both; the bass's holds are the only evidence that separates them.

A bass that holds through a change marks the barline

At two chords a bar the chords change on the barline and on the half-bar alike, so a reading of where they change is at chance, and the metre ties the two. The bass has one more piece of evidence: a change inside the bar can be voiced over the note already sounding, and a change on the barline is voiced over its root. Hold the bass through one mid-bar change in six and the metre and bass together place the barline in 85 per cent of eight-bar passages; one in three, 97. The convention cannot be stronger than that, and the chord changes, asked first, only get in the way.

harmony · Progression

Named alongside it

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

MetreProgressionInferenceChord segmentationEvidenceExpectationInformationMetrical weightSegmentationSurpriseHarmonic analysisNull model

All concepts