Acoustics & Music Theory
why it sounds like that
The collection

Every essay — page 8

Page 8 of 27, 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.

Every result so far, against the listener's own noise. Three findings drawn against the one parameter all of them assume: how finely the listener resolves a pitch. At 11 cents — a trained listener, and the value every earlier essay used — the octave holds 6 nameable categories, twelve equal ones are named right 91 per cent of the time, and a 20-to-one expectation moves a boundary by 3.6 cents. At 35 cents it is 2 categories, 72 per cent, and 37 cents. The capacity falls roughly as one over sigma and the shift rises as its square, so the three curves separate rather than moving together.

The listener the model was never run for

Five earlier essays rest on one number — how finely a listener resolves a pitch — and every one of them used a trained listener's eleven cents. The model's dependence on it is not gentle: the capacity goes as its reciprocal and the expectation shift as its square, so an untrained listener at thirty-five cents has two nameable categories per octave rather than six, and a foreign tuning system is not mis-transcribed by them but absorbed.

6 figures What eleven positions cover, at seven to the octave and at twelve. A clef's 11 positions, read as a range, in three systems. At seven positions to the octave they cover 1.57 octaves — an octave and a fourth, which is the seventh rung's own number. At twelve they cover 0.92. Writing a 44-semitone range then takes 3 staves and about 15 ledger positions on the staff, and 4 staves and 33 on a chromatic one. The accidentals a chromatic staff removes are paid for in vertical space, at a rate the two integers fix.

The notations invented for the overflow

Every proposal to replace the staff since the seventeenth century is a response to a specific overflow, and the commonest one — a chromatic staff with twelve positions per octave instead of seven — makes a trade computable from the same two integers the clef essay counted. It buys the accidentals outright and pays 40 per cent of the range, three ledger positions for one, and twenty-three enharmonic distinctions that are not merely absent from the page but unrecoverable.

6 figures What the engraver used here gives a note, measured off the page. The horizontal distance VexFlow allots each duration, read back off a formatted system rather than quoted from a manual. It is not a power of the duration: it is a constant of 58 points plus 15 points a crotchet, and the constant is 93 per cent of the width the shortest note here gets. A note four times as long as another is about 2 times as wide, not four. The floor is the notehead, its stem, its accidental and the space a reader needs to see them as separate events — which is a claim about legibility and not about time at all.

The axis that is not a time axis

Eight earlier essays have measured the staff's vertical axis to a position. Its horizontal one has never been asked about, and the answer is that it is proportional to nothing: measured off the typesetter used here, a note gets 58 points before its duration is considered at all and 15 points a crotchet after — so the constant is 93 per cent of what the shortest note gets, and a note four times as long is not four times as wide.

6 figures Every resolution claim here, against the number it rests on. How many equal steps of the octave can be named at 95 per cent accuracy, against the internal noise the model gives a listener. The laboratory value this collection quotes everywhere is 11 cents, which gives 6 nameable categories — the "about seven per octave" every claim here has been repeating. The laboratory measures it on isolated intervals and music never presents one, so the effective value inside a piece is smaller by an amount nobody has measured: at 4 cents it is 18, which is the chromatic scale, and the conclusion changes from "the ear has fewer boxes than the notation" to "it has exactly as many". Nothing here measures it. This is what it is worth if it moves.

The number every claim here has been quoting

Sigma is the internal noise a listener's pitch judgements carry, it is measured in a laboratory on isolated intervals, and music never presents an isolated interval. Every resolution claim here rests on the laboratory value. Sweep it and the headline finding moves: at eleven cents the ear has about six nameable categories per octave, and at six it has twelve — which is the chromatic scale, and turns 'the ear has fewer boxes than the notation' into 'it has exactly as many'.

7 figures The one number the ordered key-finder was tuned on. For each rate of alternation between two keys, the cost of changing key at which the model stops hearing two keys and starts hearing borrowed chords in one. The threshold rises with the period — 0.95 at 1 bar, 0.95 at 2 bars, 0.95 at 4 bars, 2.00 at 8 bars, 3.50 at 16 bars — so the parameter and the rate trade off against each other exactly. The value tuned earlier, 2.2, sits above every threshold on this axis, which means its verdict about fast alternation was a consequence of the tuning rather than a finding about the music. Filled means the model names two keys; hollow means it names one and calls the rest borrowings.

A modulation and a borrowing are one number apart

The key-finder that keeps the order has one tuned parameter, and said so. Sweep it and the parameter turns out to be the whole verdict: below a threshold the model hears two keys alternating, above it one key with borrowed chords. The threshold rises with how slowly the keys alternate — and the value it chose sits above every threshold in range, so its finding about fast alternation was a consequence of the tuning.

7 figures How sure the reading is, bar by bar. Every earlier essay reports one best reading. A dynamic program that finds a best path has, by construction, the best score into every state at every bar — so the gap between the best reading and the best reading in any other key is already computed and has never been printed. Here it is, in bits, for the thirty-two-bar AABA. The mean margin is 1.14 bits and 13 of 32 bars are inside one bit of a rival reading, which is where a listener would be genuinely undecided. The reading itself names C, E, B, D, G; the margin says what that naming is worth, and at the weakest bar — bar 31, C over F — it is worth 0.07.

The margin the dynamic program already had

Nine earlier essays produce a single best reading, and the passages worth arguing about are the ones where two readings are nearly equally good. What is needed for that has been inside the model from early on: a dynamic program that finds a best path has, by construction, the best score into every state at every bar — so the gap between the best reading and the best reading in any other key is already computed, and printing it turns every analysis here into a measurement of ambiguity.

6 figures How much music each notation fits on a page. The two axes multiplied. Vertically, a system is as tall as the staves the range needs; horizontally, a system holds as many notes as fit once the shortest is wide enough to read. the staff, seven to the octave: 3 staves to the system, 4 systems and 38 notes to a system, 152 notes to the page — 46 seconds at 100 beats a minute, so a page turn every 46 seconds; a chromatic staff, twelve to the octave: 4 staves to the system, 3 systems and 38 notes to a system, 114 notes to the page — 34 seconds at 100 beats a minute, so a page turn every 34 seconds; a whole-tone staff, six to the octave: 2 staves to the system, 7 systems and 38 notes to a system, 266 notes to the page — 80 seconds at 100 beats a minute, so a page turn every 80 seconds. a whole-tone staff, six to the octave holds 2.33 times what a chromatic staff, twelve to the octave does, which is a difference of 1.00 page turns a minute — and a page turn is a thing a player with two hands occupied cannot do.

How much music a page holds

Nine earlier essays have measured notations, and every one of them is a page — a two-dimensional object read in a fixed order by a reader who has to turn it. One measured the vertical axis and another the horizontal, and multiplying them gives the one design constraint on notation that is not about legibility at all: a chromatic staff turns pages a third more often than an ordinary one, and a proportional spacing rule turns them nearly twice as often as a columnar one.

7 figures How much of the reading comes from what has not happened yet. Every margin reported earlier is two-sided: the best path through a key at a bar is the best score into it plus the best score onward from it, and the second half uses bars a listener has not heard. Dropping that term is one line, because the dynamic program already had both halves separately. The mean margin falls from 3.90 bits with hindsight to 1.79 without it, so 54 per cent of this passage's certainty is retrospective. The two passes never disagree about which key is best here, so the hindsight buys confidence rather than a different answer. This is the quantity every earlier essay has assumed and none has measured.

How much of the reading arrives late

Every margin reported earlier is two-sided: the best path through a key at a bar is the score into it plus the score onward from it, and the second half uses bars a listener has not heard. Dropping that term is one line. On a thirty-two-bar song it removes more than half the certainty, and on a passage built to be ambiguous it changes the key named at nine bars out of eleven.

6 figures Every standard rastral size against the two bounds a reader imposes. Print the notes larger and the eye-hand span stops fitting inside one fixation, so the reader has to saccade ahead faster than the eye can move. Print them smaller and a notehead stops subtending enough angle to be identified. Both bounds come from the reader and neither from the music. At 100 beats a minute with 2 notes to the beat, the acuity bound sits at 1.63 millimetres and the saccade bound at 7.5 — so the saccade rate is nowhere near binding and acuity is doing all the work, which is the opposite of what the eye-hand span suggests. 5 of the 9 standard rastrals clear the acuity bound: rastral 4 and larger. Those are exactly the sizes used for parts, and the ones below are used for study scores — which are read at a desk rather than played from at a stand, and a shorter viewing distance moves the bound with them.

The page is read by an eye

A sight-reader's eye sits a fixed number of notes ahead of the sounding one and a fixation takes in a fixed number of millimetres, and the spacing rule converts between them. Two bounds follow, from the reader rather than from the music — and the one everybody would expect to bind does not. The saccade rate has enormous headroom at any playable tempo, and what decides is acuity.

6 figures The same eight notes are four times as much to read. How many bits each note of a line carries, taken as minus the log of the probability of the interval that reached it, under the distribution of melodic steps measured over the tunes used throughout. A scale costs 1.76 bits a note and a wide leaps costs 7.02 — a factor of 4.0 at the same number of notes on the page. Every quantity computed until now counts notes, and the page cannot tell these apart: eight quavers are eight quavers of horizontal space whichever line they spell.

A reader does not read notes

Eleven earlier essays count notes, and the page cannot tell one line of eight quavers from another. A reader can: a scale of eight is one object where eight leaps are eight. Measured against the melodic interval distribution, the same eight notes are four times as much to read — and the eye–hand span, the best-measured quantity in the reading literature, is four notes of a tune and one of a leaping line.

7 figures one measured slendro is the scale least committed to a spectrum. Each scale drawn, placed by how smooth it is against 2000 random scales of the same size, under 4 spectra. Low is smooth. Every one of them lands in the smoothest third under every spectrum, so the account that a spectrum chooses a scale survives as a statement about levels. What separates them is the length of each row's line, which is how much the answer moves when the instrument changes: one measured slendro spans 2.9 percentile points and Rast, Turkish theory spans 17.6, a factor of 6.0. The scale usually offered as the case for spectral matching is the one whose standing barely depends on the spectrum, and Rast, Turkish theory is the one that depends on it most.

The scale least committed to its own instrument

The essays on scales beyond twelve draw scales without spectra and spectra without scales, and none of them had put a tradition's own degrees through the roughness model. Doing it for six scales and five spectra says the account survives — every tradition lands between the eighth and the twenty-sixth percentile of random scales of its size, and under a pure tone not one of them does. But the scale whose standing moves least when the instrument changes is the gamelan's, at 2.9 percentile points, and the one that moves most is the five-limit diatonic at 17.4. The scale the argument is usually made about is the one it explains least.

7 figures 6 step patterns, 2 category counts, and only the count matters. Each scale drawn as its own steps across the octave, with the share of trials a listener whose internal noise is 11 cents names correctly — and, beside it, the same figure for a scale of equally spaced degrees of the same size. The two agree to three decimal places on every row, though the narrowest step here is 100 cents on the diatonic major, tempered and the widest is 300. Naming is lost at boundaries, an n-degree scale has n of them wherever they are put, and each costs the same as long as no category is narrow enough for the noise to carry an estimate clean across it — 9.1 standard deviations, at the worst here.

A boundary costs the same wherever it is put

Every capacity figure drawn until now cuts the octave into equal categories, and no scale in the world is equal. Putting the real step patterns through the same model returns exactly the same accuracy to four decimal places — because naming is lost at boundaries, an n-degree scale has n of them wherever they are, and each costs the mean absolute value of the noise. That turns the most-quoted result about hearing from a search into one line: 1504 times one minus the criterion, over sigma.

7 figures The term that was owed, and the corpus cannot hold it. For each of the three tunes everything here is measured on, how many of its notes have a duration that differs from the gap to the next onset. The answer is none, in 101 notes: these tunes are stored as a list of pitches and lengths with no rests in them, so a note's duration IS its inter-onset interval and conditioning one on the other leaves exactly zero bits. That is a fact about the representation rather than about music. The prediction was that the term would be small, and it could not have been known that the corpus would make it identically zero — which means the prediction cannot be tested here and the exceptions have to be priced directly.

A note lasts until the next one starts

Pricing where a note is against which note it is left duration as the term it had not, with a prediction that it would be small. Measured on the three tunes these readings are built on, it is exactly zero — and it is zero by construction, because those tunes are stored as pitches and lengths with no rests in them, so every duration is its own inter-onset interval. The prediction cannot be tested on the corpus that produced it. Priced directly, a rest costs 0.67 bits a note where a tenth of the notes have one, which is not well under half a bit.

5 figures 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