Cognitive Constraints on Compositional Systems: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:12, 16 October 2012

Latest revision as of 02:07, 29 October 2023

(32 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Short description|Essay by Fred Lerdahl}}

[[Fred Lerdahl]]'s '''"Cognitive Constraints on Compositional Systems"''' is an essay by [[Fred Lerdahl]] that cites [[Pierre Boulez]]'s ''[[Le Marteau sans Maîtremaître]]'' (1955) as an example of "a huge gap between compositional system and cognized result," though he "could have illustrated just as well with works by [[Milton Babbitt]], [[Elliott Carter]], [[Luigi Nono]], [[Karlheinz Stockhausen]], or [[Iannis Xenakis]]". (In [[semiologysemiotics|semiological]] terms, this is a gap between the [[esthesic and poietic]] processes.) To explain this gap, and in hopes of bridging it, Lerdahl proposes the concept of a [[musical grammar]], "a limited set of rules that can generate indefinitely large sets of musical events and/or their structural descriptions.". He divides this further into compositional grammar and listening grammar, the latter being one "more or less unconsciously employed by auditors, that generates mental representations of the music". He divides the former into natural and artificial compositional grammars. While the two have historically been fruitfully mixed, a natural grammar arises spontaneously in a culture while an artificial one is a conscious invention of an individual or group in a culture; the gap can arise only between listening grammar and artificial grammars. To begin to understand the listening grammar, Lerdahl and [[Ray Jackendoff]] created a theory of musical cognition, ''[[Generative theory of tonal music|A Generative Theory of Tonal Music]]'' (1983; {{ISBN |0-262-62107-X}}). That theory is outlined in the essay. Lerdahl's constraints on artificial compositional grammars are:

==Constraints on event sequences==

Lerdahl's constraints on artificial compositional grammars are:

===Event sequences===

*''Constraint 1'': The musical surface must be capable of being parsed into a sequence of discrete events.

**[counterexample: [[György Ligeti|Ligeti]], [[computer music]]]

*''Constraint 2'': The musical surface must be available for [[hierarchical]] structuring by the listening grammar.

**[through grouping structure, metrical structure, time-span reduction, and prolongational reduction. "Associational" factors such as [[Motif (music)|motivic]] development and [[timbre|timbral]] relations are ignored, but for "Timbral Hierarchies" see Lerdahl 1987]{{incomplete short citation|date=December 2021|reason=Or is 1988 meant?}}

*''Constraint 3'': The establishment of local grouping boundaries requires the presence of salient distinctive transitions at the musical surface.

**[counterexample: [[minimal music]]]

*''Constraint 4'': Projections of groups, especially at larger levels, depends on [[symmetry]] and on the establishment of musical [[parallelism (music)|parallelism]]s.

*''Constraint 5'': The establishment of a [[Metre (poetry)|metrical structure]] requires a degree of regularity in the placement of [[Stress (linguistics)|phenomenal accent]]s.

*''Constraint 6'': A complex time-span segmentation depends on the projection of complex grouping and metrical structures.

Line 15 ⟶ 19:

*''Constraint 8'': The projection of a prolongational tree depends on a corresponding time-span tree in conjunction with a set of stability conditions.

==Constraints on underlying=Underlying materials===

*''Constraint 9'': Stability conditions must operate on a fixed collection of elements.

Line 21 ⟶ 25:

*''Constraint 10'': [[Interval (music)|Intervals]] between elements of a collection arranged along a scale should fall within a certain range of magnitude.

*''Constraint 11'': A [[pitch (music)|pitch]] collection should recur at the [[octave]] to produce [[pitch class]]es.

**[ {{Bracket|[[octave equivalency]] ]}}

*''Constraint 12'': There must be a strong [[psychoacoustic]] basis for stability conditions. For pitch collections, that requires intervals that proceed gradually from very small to comparatively large frequency [[ratio]]s.

**[ {{Bracket|[[just intonation]] ]}}

*''Constraint 13'': Division of the octave into equal parts facilitates [[transposition (music)|transposition]] and reduces memory load.

**[ {{Bracket|[[equal temperament]] ]}}

*''Constraint 14'': Assume pitch sets of ''n''-fold equal divisions of the octave. Then subsets that satisfy uniqueness, coherence, and simplicity will facilitate ___location within the overall pitch space.

**[only certain divisions of the octave, 12 and 20 included, allow uniqueness, coherence, and transpositional simplicity, and only the diatonic and pentatonic subsets of the 12-tone chromatic set follow these constraints (Balzano, 1980, 1982){{incomplete short citation|date=December 2021}}]

===Pitch Spacespace===

*''Constraint 15'': Any but the most primitive stability conditions must be susceptible to multidimensional representation, where spatial distance correlates with cognitive distance.

*''Constraint 16'': Levels of pitch space must be sufficiently available from musical surfaces to be internalized.

*''Constraint 17'': A reductionally organized pitch space is needed to express the [[steps and skips]] by which cognitive distance is measured and to express degrees of melodic completeness.

**[completedness resembles implication-realization theory (Meyer, 1973{{incomplete short citation|date=December 2021}} and Narmour, 1977{{incomplete short citation|date=December 2021}}), the ''Zug'', ''[[Urlinie]]'', and ''[[Bassbrechung]]'' ([[Heinrich Schenker|Schenker]]){{incomplete short citation|date=December 2021}}.]

He concludes, "Some of these constraints seem to me binding, others optional. Constraints 9-129–12 are essential for the very existence of stability conditions. Constraints 13-1713–17, on the other hand, can be variously jettisoned." Examples given are [[Carnatic music|South Indian music]], which doesn't [[modulation (music)|modulate]] and isn't equally tempered (13 & 14), and music such as that of [[Claude Debussy]], [[Béla Bartók]], and others who "have developed consonance-dissonance patterns directly from the [[total chromatic]]" (14-1714–17).

==Comprehensibility and value==

Line 43 ⟶ 47:

*''Aesthetic Claim 2'': The best music arises from an alliance of a compositional grammar with the listening grammar.

To these ends he proposes the use of the terms "[[complexity]]" and "complicatedness", complexity being hierarchical structural richness, and complicatedness being "numerous non-redundant events per unit time." On Lerdahl's view complexity has aesthetic value, while complicatedness is neutral. He writes, "All sorts of music satisfy these criteria -– for example, Indian [[raga]], Japanese [[Koto (musical instrument)|koto]], [[jazz]], and most Western [[art music]]. [[Rock music]] fails on grounds of insufficient complexity. Much [[contemporary music]] pursues complicatedness as compensation for a lack of complexity. In short, these criteria allow for infinite variety but only along certain lines."

"I find this conclusion both exciting and -– initially at least -– alarming...the constraints are tighter than I bargained for."

"My second aesthetic claim in effect rejects this ["progressivist"] attitude in favor of the older view that music-making should be based on "nature". For the ancients, nature may have resided in the music of the spheres, but for us it lies in the musical mind."

==Source Reception ==

Lerdahl's paper has elicited many responses.

*Lerdahl, Fred (1988). "Cognitive Constraints on Compositional Systems." In ''Generative Processes in Music: The Psychology of Performance, Improvisation, and Composition'', ed. John Sloboda, 231-59. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Reprinted in ''Contemporary Music Review'' 6/2 (1992), pp. 97-121. [http://www.bussigel.com/lerdahl/pdf/Cognitive%20Constraints%20on%20Compositional%20Systems.pdf]

[[Roger Scruton]] praised it, calling it "hard-hitting".{{sfn|Scruton|2016}}

[[Nicholas Cook]] wrote, "The idea that music is a process of communication in which listeners decode structures that composers have encoded... is... based on several disputable assumptions: that people choose to listen grammatically; that there is, or ought to be, an equivalence between compositional and listening grammars; and, most fundamentally, that there is such a thing as musical grammar".{{sfn|Cook|1994|p=88}} He writes that Lerdahl

<blockquote>assume[s] that there should be a more or less linear relationship between the manner in which a composer conceives a composition and the manner in which a listener perceives it. ...Lerdahl's aim is to specify the conditions that must be fulfilled if there is to be conformity between "compositional grammar" and "listening grammar". And... he ends up by measuring existing music against the stipulations of his theory, using this as a basis for aesthetic evaluation. The result is to write off not only the Darmstadt avant-garde and minimalism, but also huge swathes of non-Western and popular music.{{sfn|Cook|1999|p=241}}</blockquote>

He asks:

<blockquote>What... does an article like Lerdahl's "Cognitive Constraints on Compositional Systems" actually do? By subordinating the production and reception of music to theoretically defined criteria of communicative success, it creates a charmed hermeneutic circle that excludes everything from critical musicology to social psychology. It slips imperceptibly from description to prescription, so reinforcing the hegemony of theory. In this way, while the literary genre of Lerdahl's article is the scientific paper – a genre predicated on the transparent representation of an external reality – its substance lies at least equally in its illocutionary force.{{sfn|Cook|1999|p=252}}</blockquote>

Morag Josephine Grant wrote, "The paradox of Lerdahl's argument... is that while it is perfectly acceptable to adopt the composer's own system when dealing with compositional-technical analysis, it seems equally acceptable to revert to musical thinking of a quite different type when the aural result comes to be analysed".{{sfn|Grant|2001|p=218}} She continued, "Lerdahl's argument that musical language, like spoken language, is generative in structure excludes the possibility of other, non-hierarchical methods of achieving musical coherence... Lerdahl's concentration on the audibility of the row... blinds or deafens him to the simple fact that the use of the row is itself a constraint, not just on the composer, but in the aid of comprehensibility as well".{{sfn|Grant|2001|p=219}}

John Croft's master's degree thesis examines Lerdahl's essay in depth. In his conclusion, he wrote:<blockquote>we have plenty of music that does not conform to Lerdahl's grammar: what, then, are people who claim to find it as interesting as tonal-metrical music actually doing? Either they are deluding themselves, or they are lying, or they have non-human brains. None of these answers seems entirely satisfactory. But if we do not like any of these answers, then we must admit that it is a matter of exposure and acquired understanding after all, in which case we are certainly a far cry from innate psychological universals [...] Vague language and tacit assumptions can be brought into the service of conservatism and aesthetic authoritarianism. It points to the misguided nature of attempts to turn the question of the dissemination of post-tonal music from an aesthetic, political, and indeed economic issue into a cognitive-scientific one. In this age when words like "accessibility" and "communication" are used too frequently and with too little understanding, it is of some significance that at least one major attempt to give scientific respectability to the conservative side of the debate fails.{{sfn|Croft|1999|pp=54–55}}</blockquote>

For additional opinions and discussion, see {{harvtxt|Boros|1995}}, {{harvtxt|Boros|1996}}, {{harvtxt|Denham|2009}}, {{harvtxt|Dibben|1996}}, {{harvtxt|Heinemann|1993}}, {{harvtxt|Heinemann|1998}}, and {{harvtxt|Mosch|2004}}.

== References ==

{{reflist|15em}}

'''Sources'''

{{div col|colwidth=45em}}

* {{cite journal|last=Boros|first=James|year=1995|title=A 'New Totality'?|journal=[[Perspectives of New Music]]|volume=33|number=1/2|pages=538–553}}

* {{cite journal|last=Boros|first=James|year=1996|title=A Response to Lerdahl|journal=Perspectives of New Music|volume=34|number=1|pages=252–258|doi=10.2307/833505 |jstor=833505 }}

* {{cite book|last=Cook|first=Nicholas|author-link=Nicholas Cook|year=1994|chapter=Perception: A Perspective from Music Theory|title=Musical Perceptions|editor1=Rita Aiello|editor2=[[John Sloboda|John A. Sloboda]]|pages=64–95|___location=Oxford|publisher=Oxford University Press}}

* {{cite book|last=Cook|first=Nicholas|year=1999|chapter=Analysing Performance and Performing Analysis|title=Rethinking Music|editor1=Nicholas Cook|editor2=[[Mark Everist]]|pages=239–261|___location=Oxford|publisher=Oxford University Press}}

* {{cite thesis|last=Croft|first=John|year=1999|title=Musical memory, complexity, and Lerdahl's cognitive constraints|type=Master of Music thesis|publisher=Department of Music, University of Sheffield}}

* {{cite journal|last=Denham|first=A. E.|date=September 2009|title=The Future of Tonality|journal=[[British Journal of Aesthetics]]|volume=49 |issue=4 |pages=427–450|doi=10.1093/aesthj/ayp031 }}

* {{cite thesis|last=Dibben|first=Nicola|year=1996|title=The Role of Reductional Representations in the Perception of Atonal Music|type=Unpublished doctoral dissertation|publisher=Department of Music, University of Sheffield}}

* {{cite book|last=Grant|first=Morag Josephine|year=2001|title=Serial Music Serial Aesthetics: Compositional Theory in Post-War Europe|series=Music in the Twentieth Century|others=[[Arnold Whittall]], general editor|___location=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press}}

* {{cite thesis|last=Heinemann|first=Stephen|year=1993|title=Pitch-class Set Multiplication in Boulez's 'Le Marteau sans maitre' with [Original Composition]|type=Doctor of Musical Arts thesis|publisher=Department of Music, University of Washington}}

* {{cite journal|last=Heinemann|first=Stephen|year=1998|title=Pitch-Class Set Multiplication in Theory and Practice|journal=[[Music Theory Spectrum]]|volume=20|number=1|pages=72–96|doi=10.2307/746157 |jstor=746157 }}

* {{cite book|last=Mosch|first=Ulrich|author-link=Ulrich Mosch|year=2004|title=Musikalisches Hören serieller Musik: Untersuchungen am Beispiel von Pierre Boulez' «Le Marteau sans maître»|___location=Saarbrücken|publisher=Pfau-Verlag}}

* {{cite web|last=Scruton|first=Roger|author-link=Roger Scruton|year=2016|url=http://www.futuresymphony.org/the-clothes-have-no-emperor|title=The Clothes Have No Emperor|website=Future Symphony Institute|access-date=12 December 2021}}

{{div col end}}

==Further reading==

{{div col|colwidth=45em}}

* Ashby, Arved. 2004. "Intention and Meaning in Modernist Music." In ''The Pleasure of Modernist Music: Listening, Meaning, Intention, Ideology'', ed. Arved Ashby, 23–45. Rochester, New York: University of Rochester Press.

* Bauer, Amy. 2004. "'Tone-Color, Movement, Changing Harmonic Planes': Cognition, Constraints, and Conceptual Blends in Modernist Music." In ''The Pleasure of Modernist Music: Listening, Meaning, Intention, Ideology'', ed. Arved Ashby, 121–152. Rochester, New York: University of Rochester Press.

* Bouz, John. 2013. ''Examining the Application of Principles of Auditory Perception to Music Analysis: Building a Perception-based Music Theory to Capture Musical Features of Palestrina's Missa Aeterna Christi Munera.'' Master of Arts thesis, Department of Music, University of Calgary.

* [[Nicholas Cook|Cook, Nicholas]]. 2007. ''Music, Performance, Meaning: Selected Essays.'' Ashgate Contemporary Thinkers on Critical Musicology Series. Aldershot: Ashgate.

* Horn, Walter. 2015. "Tonality, Musical Form, and Aesthetic Value". ''[[Perspectives of New Music]]'' 53, no. 2: 201–235.

* [[Fred Lerdahl|Lerdahl, Fred]] (1988). "Cognitive Constraints on Compositional Systems." In ''Generative Processes in Music: The Psychology of Performance, Improvisation, and Composition'', ed. [[John Sloboda]], 231-59231–259. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Reprinted in ''Contemporary Music Review'' 6/2 (1992), pp. 97-121&nbsp;97–121. ([http://www.bussigel.com/lerdahl/pdf/Cognitive%20Constraints%20on%20Compositional%20Systems.pdf text])

* Meelberg, Vincent. 2006. ''New Sounds, New Stories: Narrativity in Contemporary Music.'' Leiden: Leiden University Press.

* Rowe, Robert. 1992. ''Interactive Music Systems.'' Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

{{div col end}}

[[Category:EssaysMusic cognition]]

[[Category:Essays about music]]

[[Category:1988 essays]]

[[Category:Philosophy of music]]

[[Category:Cognitive musicology]]