The collection

Every essay — page 7

Page 7 of 21, continuing through the fields in the same order.

Pitch and tuning Intervals and chords Scales and modes Harmony and voice leading Rhythm and metre Timbre and acoustics Perception and the listener Instruments and their design Form and structure Series Objects Sounds Search

Scales and modes

Which seven of the twelve, and what changes when the same seven start somewhere else.

A tie is charged twice, and the second charge is the larger one. What a tie costs a reader, against the share of noteheads that are the second of a tied pair. The lower curve is the decision itself — is this notehead an event or a continuation? — at 0.52 bits a note where a tenth of them are tied. The upper curve adds what the extra noteheads cost on every other axis: a tied continuation has a pitch and a position and is read like any other notehead before the reader discovers it carries no event, at 4.79 bits each. The total is 1.05 bits a note, which is 2.0 times the decision alone and is a fifth of what a whole note of music costs. A tie is the most expensive mark on the staff per occurrence, and every published account of notational difficulty treats it as a minor one.

The notehead that is not a note

Every quantity so far is charged per notehead, and a tie is the one mark on the staff that puts a notehead on the page carrying no event. Its cost is not the decision that identifies it — that is half a bit where a tenth of the noteheads are continuations. It is the decision plus the whole reading of a notehead that turns out to have been unnecessary, which is 1.05 bits, twice the decision and a fifth of what a note of music costs. Set beside a dot and a longer note value, the tie is five times the price of either and is the only one of the three that can cross a barline.

5 figures
Leaps do not fall where offbeats do, and a reader gets the difference free. Where each size of melodic move actually lands in the bar, over the 101 moves of the three tunes measured here. The two axes are priced separately everywhere and they are not independent: the mutual information between them is 0.31 bits a note, which is 20 per cent of the smaller of the two. That is the amount the sum over-charges. A reader who has seen where a note falls already knows something about how far it moved, so the joint cost is 3.47 bits rather than the 3.79 the two axes add to — and every reading load computed so far is high by the difference.

Leaps do not fall where offbeats do

Every reading load computed so far is a sum of two terms priced as though the axes were independent, and an earlier essay named the interaction it could not reach. Measured on the same hundred and one notes every other essay uses, the mutual information between how far a note moves and where it falls in the bar is 0.31 bits — a fifth of the smaller axis, and a sixth of a note's total load. Every reading load published so far is high by that amount, and the quantity saturates at exactly the grid the tunes are notated on, which is the check that it is measuring the music rather than the grid.

5 figures
One number a page, and what a hard rhythm buys against a hard tune. Every combination of six kinds of line and seven kinds of rhythm, placed by what each axis costs a reader. The duration term (0.67 bits) and the interaction (0.31) are the same for every cell, so the diagonals are pages of equal difficulty and the exchange rate between the two axes is the slope of one. The pitch axis spans 5.26 bits across the six lines and the position axis 4.46 across the seven rhythms, so a composer choosing between the hardest line and the hardest rhythm is choosing between quantities within 18 per cent of each other. The hardest page is wide leaps in off the beat at 14.0 bits a note and the easiest is a scale on the beat at 4.2.

One number for a page

Four terms and an interaction give a single bit rate per note, and with it the exchange rate a long run of essays has been pointing at. Six kinds of line span 5.26 bits and seven kinds of rhythm span 4.46, so a composer trading a harder tune against a harder rhythm is trading quantities within eighteen per cent of each other — and pages that look nothing alike sit on the same contour. The hardest page on the grid costs 13.96 bits a note and the easiest 4.24, a factor of three and a half, and the subject closes there.

5 figures
One noise everywhere, and the noise each boundary actually gets. The seven boundaries of the tempered diatonic scale, with the noise the earlier model gives each of them — 11 cents, the same everywhere — and the noise the harmonicity model gives them instead, which runs from 11.0 cents to 35.6. The error rate is the sum of these over the octave rather than seven copies of one, so it rises from 5.1 per cent to 11.8. And the moment the boundaries differ, where they are put matters: a scale that moved its degrees would move its boundaries onto different intervals and would pay a different sum. That is the earlier null broken by the assumption its own last section named.

A boundary beside a fifth

A closed form established earlier says an n-category division costs n·σ·√(2/π) whatever the widths are, so a boundary costs the same wherever it is put and the step pattern cannot matter. Its own last section named the assumption that produces the null: one σ, applied to every boundary in the octave. Let σ follow how securely each interval is held and the formula becomes a sum over boundaries rather than n copies of one — the diatonic's error rises from 5.1 per cent to 11.8, and where the degrees are put matters again.

5 figures
The best seven of the twelve is a scale nobody has ever used. All 462 ways of choosing seven of the twelve semitones with the tonic fixed, ranked by the identification error the harmonicity model gives them. The best is C C♯ F♯ G A♭ B♭ B at 8.8 per cent and the worst is 13.4; the diatonic major sits at rank 376, in the worse fifth of the ranking, at 11.8. The optimum is a cluster of semitones around the tonic and around the fifth, and the reason is visible in the criterion rather than in music: a boundary next to the unison or the fifth is a boundary with very little noise on it, so the cheapest way to satisfy this measure is to crowd the degrees where the model says the ear is sharpest. A criterion whose optimum is a scale nobody plays is a criterion that is not what scales are chosen for, and the useful reading of this drawing is that rather than its winner.

The best seven of the twelve

Once the noise is allowed to differ from boundary to boundary, a scale can be chosen to minimise identification error — and the choice is a search over four hundred and sixty-two sets rather than an argument. Run, it returns a cluster of semitones around the tonic and around the fifth, and puts the diatonic major at rank 376 of 462, in the worse fifth of the ranking. A criterion whose optimum is a scale nobody has ever played is a criterion that is not what scales are chosen for, and the reason it fails is legible in the model rather than in the music.

5 figures
Each tradition's own steps against the equal division of the same size. Six scales, each drawn against the equal division into the same number of degrees, under both models of how securely an interval is held. On the harmonicity model the tempered diatonic is 11 per cent better than seven equal steps; on the profile model the same comparison is 0.9 per cent, which is nothing. The two models disagree about the one comparison anybody would want the measure for, and only one of them is free of circularity: the probe-tone profile was measured on listeners raised inside the diatonic tradition, so using it to explain why the diatonic is well chosen assumes the answer. The harmonicity model assumes only that a simple ratio is easier to hold than a complicated one.

The unequal scale that is easier to name

The whole of the earlier result was that a scale's step pattern cannot matter, and every tradition it drew agreed with the equal division of its own size to three decimal places. With one noise per boundary the comparison is live again, and the tempered diatonic beats seven equal steps by eleven per cent — while the pentatonics gain nothing and the maqam scales gain two tenths of one per cent. Only one of the two security models produces the effect, and it is the one that was not measured on listeners raised inside the tradition it is being used to explain.

5 figures
Every question is answered in a corner, not on a ridge. The degree share times the minor share, over the plane of two cues: how much of the emission is the probe-tone profile, across, and how much a bass note is worth, down, with every chord's root in the bass and a bass rule that rewards the triad rooted on the bass. It runs from 0% at a profile share of 0 and a bass weight of 0 to 87% at 0.6 and 1.5. Bass 0: 0%, 0%, 0%, 0%, 41%, 32%, 46%. Bass 0.25: 0%, 0%, 0%, 0%, 52%, 55%, 44%. Bass 0.5: 0%, 0%, 0%, 0%, 68%, 62%, 51%. Bass 1: 0%, 0%, 0%, 0%, 78%, 77%, 77%. Bass 1.5: 0%, 0%, 0%, 0%, 87%, 80%, 86%. Bass 2: 0%, 0%, 0%, 0%, 87%, 87%, 87%.

Two cues meet in a corner

The profile finds a key's tonic and the bass finds a chord's degree, and until now each was swept with the other held at nothing. Swept together across 42 settings, the plane they make is not the ridge that was predicted. The tonic is a step in one direction, at a profile share of 0.55, and the bass cannot move it; the degree is a slope in the other, rising to 89 per cent as the bass is weighted, and the profile barely touches it. Every question is answered only in a corner of the plane — and the one place the two cues overlap is the one piece of music both can rescue.

6 figures
The ninety per cent was a ceiling. The share of 188 scheme bars read right on both key and degree with a bass note worth 1.5, for three bass lines — every chord's root, a line moving to the nearest chord tone, every chord's fifth — and two ways of using the bass: rewarding the triad rooted on it, or any triad containing it. Wide bars are with no profile in the emission, narrow bars with the profile alone. root line, root rule: 89% and 86%; root line, member rule: 60% and 29%; smooth line, root rule: 68% and 46%; smooth line, member rule: 61% and 47%; sixfour line, root rule: 3% and 17%; sixfour line, member rule: 52% and 30%. The reading with no bass at all is 47%.

A bass line is not a list of roots

Every bass note the key-finder has been given was its chord's root, and under that line a bass cue reads 89 per cent of scheme bars on the right degree. Give the same chords an economical bass that moves to the nearest chord tone, as a keyboard reduction would, and nearly half of them are inverted. The cue that rewards the triad rooted on the bass then reads 68 per cent at best and worse as it is trusted more; the cue that rewards any triad containing the bass cannot be fooled and stops at 61. The same inverted line does one thing the roots never did: it puts the leading note of each new key at the bottom, and finds the rondo's modulations.

6 figures
Weighted by the pairs a melody sounds next to each other, every seven-note scale is rougher than most. Each scale placed by how smooth it is against 2000 random scales of the same size, under 4 spectra, with each pair of its degrees weighted by how often the plainest melody its ascent and descent permit sounds the two — here the pairs a melody sounds next to each other. Low is smooth. Raga Bhupali: 40.3 to 56.8, spread 16.5; Raga Deshkar: 25.1 to 37.5, spread 12.4; one measured slendro: 31.8 to 44.5, spread 12.7; Rast, Arabic theory: 92.0 to 98.6, spread 6.6; Rast, Turkish theory: 91.8 to 97.8, spread 6.0; the diatonic major, tempered: 90.7 to 97.0, spread 6.3; the diatonic major, five-limit just: 91.8 to 97.8, spread 6.0.

The smoothness is in the skips

Traditional scales come out smoother than random scales of their size because every pair of their degrees is counted once. Count only the pairs a melody on the scale actually sounds next to each other, and every seven-note scale here is rougher than ninety per cent of random ones, under every spectrum, and under a pure tone as well. The smoothness is carried by the pairs a melody reaches by skipping — its thirds and above all its fifths, which are smoother than all but two random scales in two thousand. Counted by their own ascents and descents, the two ragas that share one set of notes stand in different places at last: Deshkar's skipped Re buys a smoother ascent and costs it the fifths.

7 figures
Weighted by the ring of the note before, a note every 0.6 seconds, Raga Deshkar moves least. Each scale placed by how smooth it is against 2000 random scales of its size under 4 instruments, each with its own spectrum and its own ring, with every pair of notes its plainest melody sounds weighted by how much of the earlier note is still sounding when the later one begins, a note every 0.6 seconds. Low is smooth. Raga Bhupali: plucked string, 6 s 53.6, long-ringing string, 12 s 35.8, blown note, 2 s hall 41.3, free bar, 4 s 58.5; spread 22.8; Raga Deshkar: plucked string, 6 s 39.0, long-ringing string, 12 s 25.9, blown note, 2 s hall 26.1, free bar, 4 s 42.0; spread 16.1; one measured slendro: plucked string, 6 s 42.9, long-ringing string, 12 s 27.8, blown note, 2 s hall 32.6, free bar, 4 s 46.4; spread 18.6; Rast, Arabic theory: plucked string, 6 s 92.0, long-ringing string, 12 s 65.2, blown note, 2 s hall 92.3, free bar, 4 s 96.1; spread 30.9; Rast, Turkish theory: plucked string, 6 s 88.0, long-ringing string, 12 s 58.1, blown note, 2 s hall 90.8, free bar, 4 s 93.6; spread 35.5; the diatonic major, tempered: plucked string, 6 s 84.8, long-ringing string, 12 s 54.2, blown note, 2 s hall 89.5, free bar, 4 s 91.3; spread 37.0; the diatonic major, five-limit just: plucked string, 6 s 87.7, long-ringing string, 12 s 56.7, blown note, 2 s hall 90.3, free bar, 4 s 92.9; spread 36.2.

A scale is committed to how long its instrument rings

A traditional scale's standing on the roughness model moves when the instrument changes, and that movement was read as a commitment to the instrument's spectrum. Weight every pair of notes a melody sounds by how much of the earlier note is still ringing when the later one begins, and the movement grows — the tempered diatonic's by 37 percentile points at a note every 0.6 seconds — but almost none of it is the spectrum. Put four instruments' rings on one spectrum and the scale moves 38.6 points; put four spectra under one ring and it moves 9.4. And the partials that make a fifth smooth are the first to stop sounding.

6 figures
The tempo moves it further than the touch does. One measured slendro, scored among random scales of its size under a free bar, 4 s, at five tempi and under each touch. Left to ring it runs from 29 at 0.15 seconds a note to 83 at 2.4 — a span of 54 percentile points, where the two touches differ by at most 17. So the scale is smoother than most of its size when the music is fast and rougher than most when it is slow, and how the bar is damped is the smaller decision. The two touches converge at the slow end because a bar that has died before its successor is sounding against nothing whatever the player does.

The tempo moves a scale further than the touch

A gamelan is played two ways on the same bars: a saron's are damped as the next is struck and a gendèr's ring over their resonators. That decision moves a slendro's standing among random scales of its size by up to seventeen percentile points, which is real. Over the tempo levels a piece actually moves through it moves by fifty-four — from the twenty-ninth percentile at a fast elaboration to the eighty-third at a slow one. The same five pitches on the same bars are a smoother-than-average scale and a rougher-than-average one, and which depends on how fast they are played.

5 figures
The scale's standing belongs to the ringing instrument. Where a measured slendro sits among random five-note scales, at three density ratios, scored three ways: the two instruments together, the fast ringing part on its own, and the slow damped part on its own. At one slow note to 2 fast ones the ensemble is at the 7th percentile, the ringing part alone at the 6th, and the damped part alone at the 95th; At one slow note to 4 fast ones the ensemble is at the 5th percentile, the ringing part alone at the 7th, and the damped part alone at the 95th; At one slow note to 8 fast ones the ensemble is at the 5th percentile, the ringing part alone at the 5th, and the damped part alone at the 95th. A low percentile is a scale smoother than most of its size. The damped part on its own is rougher than nineteen random scales in twenty, because it has almost no simultaneity for its intervals to be smooth in; the ensemble is at the ringing part's figure throughout. And the cross pairs, which are a quarter of the roughness, do not make the ensemble worse than either part alone.

The scale belongs to the ringing instrument

A gamelan plays two instruments on one scale at once — a saron damped at every stroke and a gendèr several times faster with its bars left to ring — and a quarter of the roughness a listener receives falls on pairs that cross between them, which no figure had computed. The cross pairs turn out to be no worse than either stream's own. What decides the scale's standing is the fast part: the ensemble sits at the sixth percentile among random five-note scales and so does the ringing instrument alone, while the damped one alone sits at the ninety-sixth.

5 figures
Given the bar in octaves, the cue gets the degree back. How often the reading names the right scale degree, against how much the bass cue is worth, under three rules for what a bass note rewards. the bass is the root: 68 per cent at best; the bass is some chord tone: 67 per cent at best; the bar in octaves: 92 per cent at best; the bass is the root, on a root line: 89 per cent at best. The published cue rewards the triad rooted on the bass, which is right only when the chord is in root position; rewarding any triad containing the bass is right always and rewards three chords a bar instead of one. The third rule is not a bass cue at all — given the bar voiced in octaves a listener knows which three pitch classes are sounding, and that names the chord outright. It reaches 92 per cent on a real line against the published cue's 68 on the same line, and the dashed curve is what that cue manages on a line made entirely of roots — 89 per cent.

Given the bar in octaves, the degree comes back

A bass note is a bare pitch class in the usual figure, and a register in any realisation anybody plays. Voice each bar in octaves and a listener knows which three pitch classes are sounding and which is at the bottom, which names the chord outright — and the rule that uses it reads the right scale degree in 92 per cent of bars on a real bass line, against 68 for the published cue on the same line and 89 for that cue on a line made entirely of roots. The question was whether the register recovers the 89. It recovers it and passes it.

5 figures
A sharper cue is worth nothing to a reading that will follow it anywhere. How often the reading names the right scale degree, against how much it costs to change key, at a bass worth 1.5 on a real bass line. the bass is the root: 20 per cent at a key cost of 0.5 and 68 at 4; the bass is some chord tone: 47 per cent at a key cost of 0.5 and 59 at 4; the bar in octaves: 46 per cent at a key cost of 0.5 and 91 at 4; roots, and a line of roots: 49 per cent at a key cost of 0.5 and 91 at 4. Where a key change is cheap the rule that names the chord outright reads no better than the rule that names three — 46 against 47 per cent — because a reading that will move key for one bar's evidence follows a sharp cue wherever it points. The sharper cue's whole advantage appears only once the reading is reluctant enough to stay put, and by a key cost of 2.2 it is 31 points ahead.

A sharper cue is worth nothing to a reading that moves

The rule that names the chord outright reads 92 per cent of scale degrees right where the published bass cue reads 68 — at the key cost these readings have always been run at. Sweep that cost and the advantage is not a property of the cue. Where a change of key is cheap the sharp rule reads 46 per cent and the vaguest rule 47, because a reading that will move key on one bar's evidence follows a sharp cue wherever it points. The cue's whole value is borrowed from the model's reluctance to be moved.

5 figures
The two parameters are not one, and the reason is a ceiling. The plane of the two parameters these readings have been swept one at a time: how much weight the bass cue carries, against what a change of key costs. Every cell is how often the reading names the right scale degree, and the lines are the contours of equal share. along the 50 per cent contour the product of the two coordinates runs from 0.10 to 0.50; along the 60 per cent contour the product of the two coordinates runs from 0.43 to 1.84; along the 70 per cent contour the product of the two coordinates runs from 0.66 to 2.56; along the 80 per cent contour the product of the two coordinates runs from 1.85 to 4.91; along the 90 per cent contour the product of the two coordinates runs from 2.71 to 15.20. If the two multiplied cleanly those products would be constant and the contours would be hyperbolae. They are not: every contour turns upward and then vertical, because past a bass weight of about 3 more of the cue buys nothing at all and only reluctance is left to buy anything with. The key cost has an interior best, at 3 on this grid, where the reading names 93 per cent of degrees — so a reading that will not change key at all is worse than one that will, which no sweep of a single parameter had found.

The two parameters turn out to have a ceiling between them

The essay before this one asked whether the bass cue's weight and the cost of changing key are one quantity with two names, and said the test was a contour: if they multiply, the curves of equal degree share are hyperbolae. They are not. Along the ninety per cent contour the product of the two runs from 2.7 to 15.2, because past a bass weight of about one and a half the reading saturates and more cue buys nothing. And the sweep finds something no single-parameter sweep here could: the key cost has a best value, and a reading that will never change key is worse than one that will.

6 figures
The ceiling is thirteen bars, and every one of them has a name. Every bar of the six schemes read by the key-finder at a key cost of 3 and a bass weight of 3, with the chord in every bar given exactly — no segmentation is involved. 175 of 188 bars have both the key and the degree right, 93.1 per cent. The misses: 7 in the thirty-two-bar song's bridge, where the chain III7 is read in E major, III7 is read in E major, VI7 is read in E major, VI7 is read in D major, II7 is read in D major, II7 is read in D major, V7 is read in D major; 4 bars of the rondo's A minor episode read as C major; 2 next to a change of key; and 0 of any other kind.

The ceiling is thirteen bars with names

The key-finder's two cues stop buying anything at about 93 per cent of scheme bars read right, and the obvious suspect was the chord segmentation feeding it. The reading was never given a segmentation: every bar arrives with its true chord. What the ceiling is made of can be listed instead, and it is thirteen bars of 188 — seven in a bridge of secondary dominants, four in a minor episode whose chords C major also owns, and two at the edges of a modulation. No weight of any cue moves one of them.

5 figures
A wrong bar costs the same whichever instrument it is on. What moving one degree of a measured slendro by 10 cents, flat or sharp, adds to the roughness per second of a two-instrument texture — a ringing part at 0.15 s a note over a damped one four times slower — on the ringing instrument and on the damped one. The ensemble in tune scores 7.47. Degree 1 (0¢): ringing 0.142 flat and 0.202 sharp, damped 0.163 and 0.185, of which beating 0.178; Degree 2 (231¢): ringing 0.119 flat and 0.068 sharp, damped 0.096 and 0.090, of which beating 0.093; Degree 3 (474¢): ringing 0.106 flat and 0.021 sharp, damped 0.069 and 0.057, of which beating 0.063; Degree 5 (717¢): ringing 0.079 flat and 0.072 sharp, damped 0.075 and 0.078, of which beating 0.077; Degree 6 (955¢): ringing 0.023 flat and 0.018 sharp, damped 0.019 and 0.022, of which beating 0.020. Over all ten errors the ringing instrument's cost 0.85 and the damped one's 0.85, and the wrong bar beating against the other instrument's right one comes to 0.86 on either — as much as the whole, because the intervals the error changes add as often as they save. One error costs about 1.1% of the texture's roughness.

A wrong bar beats the same on either instrument

The ringing instrument carries a gamelan scale's standing, so a tuning error on it was predicted to cost more than the same error on the damped instrument. Put in the beating the model lacked, and the prediction fails: moved ten cents, a degree costs the same 0.85 summed over the scale on either instrument, because almost all of the cost is the wrong bar beating against the right one on the other instrument, and a beat belongs to both of the bars that make it. Moving a whole instrument costs exactly what its five degrees cost separately, and it takes nothing from the scale's standing.

6 figures

Harmony and voice leading

Chords as places, progressions as paths, and the smallest possible move between them.

Chords as stacked intervals. Each of 4 chords — major, minor, diminished, augmented — drawn as the semitone distances above its root, with the nearest simple frequency ratio beside each note where the 5-limit table has one. Where the chords are triads they differ only in the size of the two stacked thirds, and that difference is the whole of their character.

Three notes at once, and why these three

A triad is two thirds stacked, and the four ways of stacking them behave completely differently. The difference is entirely in whether the resulting ratios are simple.

5 figures
How far the voices have to move. Three chord changes with their voices joined by the assignment that moves the least in total. The distance is computed over every way of pairing the notes, so a change that shares two of its three notes shows as two flat lines.

The shortest move, which is what a chord change is

Between any two chords there is an assignment of voices that moves the least. Compute it and the changes that composers actually use turn out to be the short ones.

6 figures
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.

8 figures
Every interval, and what it becomes when it is turned over. Each interval within the octave paired with its inversion — the interval left when the lower note is raised by an octave. The two always add to twelve semitones, so exactly one interval can be its own inversion, and it is the one at six.

The interval that inverts to itself

Six is the only number that divides twelve into two equal halves, so the tritone is the only interval unchanged by being turned over. That symmetry is not a curiosity — it is why one tritone belongs to two dominant chords, and why they resolve to keys a tritone apart.

5 figures
The twenty-four triads, and the three moves between them. Every major and minor triad, placed on the single cycle that alternating two of the three transformations produces. Neighbours round the ring differ by one voice; the chords across the middle are the third transformation. Every edge's cost is the measured voice-leading distance, and none of them is more than two semitones.

Chords as a space

Three operations turn any triad into another by moving one voice. They generate all twenty-four major and minor triads in a single cycle, their costs are one, one and two semitones, and the map that results is a geometry rather than a list of rules.

5 figures
Where a progression in pure ratios ends up. A short chord sequence taken in exact whole-number ratios, with the running difference from equal temperament measured in cents. The sequence returns to its starting chord and the pitch does not, which is the comma arriving in ordinary music.

The progression that never comes home

Just intonation is usually said to fail because a keyboard has only twelve keys. That is not the reason. Take one of the commonest chord sequences in tonal music, play every chord in exact whole-number ratios, and it arrives back on its starting chord a syntonic comma flat — on any instrument, including a voice.

6 figures
Which partials two notes have in common. The first 12 partials of a note and of the note an interval above it, on a logarithmic frequency axis, with every partial of the upper tone that lands on one of the lower marked. octave: 12 of 12, fifth: 6 of 12, fourth: 4 of 12, major third: 3 of 12, minor third: 2 of 12, minor second: 0 of 12. Sharing partials is what fusion is: two voices whose spectra mostly coincide stop being heard as two voices, which is a measurable property of the interval rather than a matter of taste.

Two voices that stop being two

The ban on parallel fifths is the most famous rule in Western music and it is usually taught as taste. It is not taste. At an octave the upper voice contributes no frequency the lower one did not already have, at a fifth it contributes half of them, and the number can be counted — which turns a prohibition into a measurement.

5 figures