Polyrhythm — where it appears
Named by 9 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
Two clocks at once, and where they agree
Three against two repeats every six subdivisions and feels like a figure. Seven against five repeats every thirty-five and feels like weather. The difference is one number.
A rhythm fast enough to be a chord
Three against two is a polyrhythm. Speed the same pattern up until the events arrive faster than about twenty a second and it is a perfect fifth. The ratio never changed, the figure never changed, and the only thing that moved is the rate — which makes rhythm and pitch one continuum with a perceptual boundary across the middle of it.
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 third pattern nobody played
Two players play two even pulses and a third rhythm arrives that neither of them played. It has a + b − 1 onsets, its gaps read the same forwards and backwards, and it uses exactly min(a, b) different lengths — which is a better account of why 3:2 is a figure and 7:5 is weather than the number used for the last three essays.
Which of the two is the beat
A polyrhythm is notated as a bar of two with three laid across it. Run the metre rules used here over the composite and they choose the three — at every ratio tried, without exception. Add the one other rule the rules have, and the answer changes hands at a bar of 1,013 milliseconds, which is 118 to the minute.
The bell is not a polyrhythm
Five earlier essays have set one pattern against another. In the practice the word cross-rhythm was borrowed from, there is one pattern and it is played against the beat — against several beats at once. Counted against the four divisions of a twelve-cycle, the Ewe bell marks half of the two, two-thirds of the three, half of the four and half of the six, and all of none of them.
One player is not two clocks
Two accounts of a pianist playing three against two, simulated from the same noise. With a timekeeper in each hand the hands drift apart by a hundred milliseconds inside two dozen bars. With one timekeeper they never drift at all. The measurement everybody cites as evidence for a timekeeper turns out to be the same number under both accounts.
A comma is a polyrhythm that never closes
Seven earlier essays have rested on a common grid. Two cycles have one when their ratio is a ratio of whole numbers, and the fifth against the octave is not — provably, from unique factorisation. So there is no grid, no composite and no least common multiple, and what is left over instead is the sequence 2, 5, 12, 41, 53 with a comma attached to each.
The ratio that stops being two
Eight earlier essays have taken two clocks at a rational ratio to be a thing a listener can hold. There is a ratio past which it is not, and the bound is not where anyone would look for it: the cycle is exactly one bar long at every ratio, so the length of the pattern separates nothing. What separates them is the closest the two streams ever come, which is one part in their least common multiple — 400 milliseconds for three against two, and seventeen for thirteen against eleven, which is not two events at all.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Cross-rhythmResultant patternEntrainmentLeast common multipleMetreRotationTempoBeatBell patternCanonChain of fifthsContinued fraction