The dynamicsof dynamics:A modelof musical expression

Nell P. McAngusTodd
Department
ofPsychology,
Universityof
Exeter,ExeterEX44QG,United
Kingdom

(Received
7 December1990;revised
27January1992;accepted
2 March 1992)
A computational
modelof musicaldynamics
is proposed
thatcomplements
an earliermodelof
expressive
timing.Themodel,implemented
in theartificialintelligence
language
LISP,is
basedon theobservation
that a musicalphraseis oftenindicatedby a crescendo/decrescendo
shape.
Thefunctional
formof thisshapeisderivedbymakingtwomainassumptions.
First,
that musicaldynamicsandtempoarecoupled,that is, "the fasterthelouder,the slowerthe
softer."Thistempo/dynamics
coupling,it issuggested,
maybea characteristic
of some
classical
andromanticstylesperhaps
exemplified
byperformances
of Chopin.Second,
thatthe
tempochangeis governed
by analogyto physicalmovement.The allusionof musical
expression
to physical
motionisfurtherextended
bytheintroduction
of theconcepts
ofenergy
andmass.The utilityof themodel,in additionto givingan insightintothenatureof musical
expression,
is thatit provides
a basisfor a methodof performance
styleanalysis.
PACS numbers: 43.75.St

Hence,again,it becomespossible
for motionin musicto imitatethepeculiarcharacteristics
of motive
forcesin space,
thatis,toforman imageof thevariousimpulses
andforceswhichlie at therootof motion.And on this,asI believe,
essentially
depends
thepowerof musictopictureemotion.[Helmholtz,
1863]
INTRODUCTION

Althoughour understanding
of musicalexpression
has
madesomeadvancessincethe publicationsof Seashoreand
co-workers(Seashore,1938) we arestill essentially
in a state

of ignorance.
What is meantby thisis that despitethe work
that hasbeendonein the last decadeor so (Shaffer,1981;
Sloboda,1983;Sundberg,1988;Clarke, 1988;Gabrielsson,
1987;Todd, 1989c)therestill existsthe vastcorpusof recordedperformances
from the earliestpianolarollsto the
latestCD thatwehavebarelytouchedin termsof analysis[a
fewexceptions
apart (Repp, 1990)]. Evenwith theprogress
that hasbeenmadein instrumenttechnology,
bothin the
form of hardwareand software,the numberof analysesof
performancesby skilled musiciansusingdirect measurement is very small.With sucha smallempiricalbasewe are
not in any positionto answermanybasicquestionssuchas
the effectsof style, individualdifferences,instrumentation,
etc. The goal of this papertherefore,is first to developa
workingmodelof musicalexpression
andsecondto demonstratein principlehowthismodelcouldprovidethebasisfor
a methodof performanceanalysis.
I. DEFINITIONS

In researchon expressive
timing,tempo,as such,is a
fictitiousvariablesinceit cannotbemeasured
directly.What
is in fact measuredis the onsettime ti of an eventsuchas a
note or chord in a series of events. In the case of metrical

musicit ispossible
to assign
a numberto theeventaccording
to its positionin the metrical grid. This numberwe refer
to here as metricaldistancex. Thus, for any sequence
of
events the basic empirical relation is a seriesof pairs

{(t,x)i Ii = 1...L}. In thesimplifying

case
that{xi+ -- xi
= 11i= 1" 'L} wemaydropthesubscript
i sincex--=iso
thatwecanwritetheseries
as{txIx = 1...L}.
If welet Atx= tx2- tx, andlet Ax = x2-- x thenby
theforwarddifferencemethodthe tempocanbe estimated
by
v'-

Ax

Atx

--

x2 - x

t, -- t,

(1)

which reducesto v --' 1/At if A.x= 1 (cfi Sundbergand

Verillo, 1980).

B. Intensity
The piano system(Shaffer, 1981) used to obtain the
data shownhere not only measuresthe onsettimesof individual notes,but also the hammer flight time T for each

keypress.The simplestestimateof note intensity,which is

adoptedhere,isto assume
Io: 1/T. For a groupingofn notes
the mean intensity is taken to be representative,i.e.,
Iec X= 1/nTi.

OF BASIC TERMS

Beforeproceeding
furtherit is usefulto definesomebasic terms. In this paper we will be consideringtwo main
variablesnamely,tempo,whichwe denoteby v, anddynamic, which we denoteby I.
3540

A. Tempo

J. Acoust.Soc. Am.91 (6), June 1992

II. TEMPO AND DYNAMICS

The modelof musicalexpression

presentedhere is an
extension
of an earliermodelof expressive
tempovariation
(Todd, 1985, 1989a, 1989b, 1989c). These earlier models of

0001-4966/92/063540-11$00.80

1992 AcousticalSociotyof America

3540

tempowerebasedon the ideathat musicalphrasinghasits

originin the kinematicand dynamicvariationsinvolvedin
singlemotoractions(Stetson,1905;Sachs,1943). Typically, suchactionshavea characteristic
velocity/force
profile
that involvesan acceleration/deceleration
in velocityand a
corresponding
riseandfall in tension.That a phraseisoften
markedby an accelerando/ritardando
shapehasnowbeen
well established(Seashore,1938;Todd, 1985; Shafferand
Todd, 1987;Repp, 1990). A corresponding
markingby a
crescendo/decrescendo
shape,whichthe motor hypothesis
wouldsuggest,
alsoappearsto havesomeempiricalsupport.
In C. E. Seashore's
ThePsychology
o
Music (Seashore,
1938) an intensivestudyby H. Seashore
wasreportedthat
involvedthe useof eightsingers.
He listeda comprehensive
"inventoryof factorsin rhythmicexpression
in singing,"distinguishingin eachcasebetween"composition"
and "performance"factors.Amongstthesemanyobservations
it was
notedthat associated
with a phrasewas"a tendencyof tonal
powerto riseto a peakand then fall away."
Gabrielsson(1987) carried out a study in which the
dynamicsand rubati from performancesof the themefrom
theMozart A-Major SonataK331 werecompared(seeFig.

1). The useof a crescendo/decrescendo

to mark a phraseis
quiteclearlyobserved
by Gabrielsson
Considered
asa whole,theamplitudeprofilewithin eachphraseshowsan increasetoward a maximum at, or closeto, the transition from the next

lastto thelastmeasure
andthenfallssteeply.The
terminationof eachphraseis thusassociated
with
diminishingamplitude.[ p. 98]
Gabrielsson
furthernotesthat thedegreeof crescendo
at
the beginningof the phraseis often a functionof the structural importanceof the phrase.
In most cases there is a crescendo before the maxi-

mum.The maximumin thesecondphraseislouder than in the first phrase,and on the whole the
dynamicrangeis largerin the secondphrasethan
the first.

Considernow the data presentedin Fig. 2, obtained

from the Bechsteinpiano at Exeter (Shaffer,1981), from
which we may make a numberof observations.
First, both
beat intensity(Ix), obtainedby taking the averagenote intensityin a beat,andtempo(vx), obtainedby takinginverse

PlaillSf[

io
$

.l's

20 PIANIST

15, PIANIST
E
o

0,

-10

-.1,
NEASUI[

#[ASUR[

FIG. 1. Note amplitudes(upper) and measuredurations(lower) from performances

of the themefrom Mozart's SonataK331 by pianistsD and E.
[AdaptedfromA. Gabrielsson,
in ActionandPerception
in RhythmandMusic,editedbyA. Gabrielsson
( RoyalSwedish
Academyof Music,Stockholm
) ].
3541

J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 91, No. 6, June 1992

Neil P. McAngus Todd: The dynamics of dynamics

3541

ESTIMATE(3 TEMPO VARIATION

2.0

On the basis of the above observations then we make the

followingproposition.

Proposition:
(a) a groupis phrasedby a crescendo/decrescendoshape;(b) the particular shapeis a function of
structuralimportance;(c) musicaldynamicsis coupledto
tempo.

In puttingforwardthisproposition
we arenot suggesting that this is a hard and fastrule for musicaldynamicsin
performance.Indeed, there are numerouscaseswhere the
dynamicincreases
at the endera sectionof phrase.What is
beingsuggested,
however,isthatthestyleof musicaldynamicsembodiedin the proposition
maybea kind of normative
defaultmodeof performancethat a performerwill adoptin
the absenceof any alternativeinstructionsin the score.

0.5

BEATS

III. A MODEL OF MUSICAL

DYNAMICS

A. Framework and assumptions

DYNAMICS
8O

7O

6o

I--

40

LJ.I
I--

3O

BEATS

FIG. 2. Estimated
tempo(top) anddynamics(bottom)fromtwoperformancesof thepreludein F-sharpminor,Chopin.

beatduration [seeEq. ( 1) ], showa highdegreeofreproduc-

ibility from oneperformance

to the next (r/,./, ----0.845,
r..... = 0.973).Whilsttheabilityofskilledperformers
toreproducetiminghasbeenknownsinceSeashore(1938), the
corresponding
reproducibilityof dynamicshasbeenrather
lesscommentedupon. Second,there is a high correlation
betweenIx and ux (rl ----0.689, r2 ----0.728), i.e., there appearsto bea tendencyto "the fasterthe louderthe slowerthe
softer."Third, often there is no direct relationshipbetween
dynamicmarkingsin the scoreand actualperformance.For
example,althougha diminuendois indicatedat beat 96 in
the scorethe performeractuallymakesa smallcrescendoin
oneperformance.
This suggests
that theexpression
marksin
a scoreareusedonlyasa roughguideby performers.Fourth,
the shapeof bothtempoandmusicaldynamicsseems,asin
the Gabrielssondata, to be a functionof structuralimportance,i.e., the moreimportantthe boundarythe greaterthe
decrescendo /ritardando.
3542

J. Acoust.Sec. Am., Vol. 91, No. 6, June 1992

The questionnow arisesof how can we implementthe

proposition
asa workingmodelwhichwecancomparewith
performancedata? In Todd (1989c) a theoreticalframework,calledan abstractexpression
system(AES), wasproposedthat specifies
that an expressive
devicehasa particular
setof objectsthat havea certainlogicalrelationshipto each
other.An abstractexpression
systemworkson the samelevel of explanationas do machinesandformal languagesin
computerscience.That is, they describea classof objects
that havecertainproperties.
The utility of an AES is at leasttwofold. First, it lays
down the basisfor the constructionof modelsof expression
in that it defineswhat kind of objectsare needed.So,rather
than startfrom scratch,the prospective
modelerhassome
ideawhat to look for. Whilst an AES isnot a completespecificationfor the modelingof any particular device,since
knowledge
of the particularcomputational
theory [in the
senseof Marr (1982) 1 is required,the device'scomponent
partswill havea well-definedlogicalrelationshipirrespective of its computationaltheory. The second,but related,
utility of an AES isthat it providesa languagewith whichto
describethe variousobjectsencounteredin musicalexpression.So, in short,an abstractexpression
systemprovidesa
way of lookingat and talking aboutexpression.
The conceptof an AES wasdeveloped
by generalizing
from the seriesof modelsof tempothe ideaof structuralto
serialmappings
andtherecoveryof structurefromthe series.The tempomodelshavein commonat leasttwothings
with othercomputational
systems
for theproduction
of expressivelymodulatedoutput (Clynes, 1987; Sundberg,
1988;Longuet-Higgins
and Lisle, 1989). First, they share
the sameoverall form that is scoreinput-internal process--,expressiveoutput.Second,to varyingdegreesof explicit-

ness,they utilize two kinds of object:(1) someaspectof

structure;(2} functionsfor encodingstructureinto serial
output. Somesystemshave the further facility for taking
datafromperformance
measurements
andattempting
to reconstructa representation(Longuet-Higginsand Lisle,
1989;Todd, 1989b).More formally,wemaysaythata model of expression
requiresthe followingcomponents:
Neil P. Me,AngusTodd:The dynamicsof dynamics

354;)

(a) a representation
of structure,usuallya treeor vector
space;

time. The durationbetweentwo eventsat x2 and x t can be

obtainedby

(b) aperformance
procedure;
(c) an encoding
function;
(d) a main independentvariable,either metricaldistance x or time t;,
( e ) a setof structurevariables,which describethe structure; and

(f) a setof st!eparameters.

In orderto build a particularmodelthen two stepsare
required( Todd, ! 990). First, we needto specifythe computational theory of the device.This will involvechoosinga

representation
of the structure,an encodingfunction,and
parameters.
Second,the computational
theorymustbeimplementedasan algorithm.The outputfrom the algorithm
canthenbeevaluatedby eitherproducingnumericaloutput
that can be comparedto performancemeasurements
or by
producingsoundthat canbe listenedto.
In the Todd (1989a) model the representationthat
formedthe inputwastakento bea groupingstructure.Prop-

(}sition(b) suggests
that groupingshouldalsoform the input to themusicaldynamicsmodel.In thepreviousmodelsit
wasfound that groupingrequirestwo variablesfor its description--group
lengthL andboundarystrength
,g--which
we may alsocarry over.
The previousencodingfunctionfor durationwasa parabola. There are, however, at least two reasonswhy we

shouldrejectthis function.First, to obtain a functionfor

musicaldynamicsfrom this would involvea quitecomplicatedtransformation.Second,thereare empiricalgrounds
forbelieving
thatthereisa betteralternative
anyway,which
isthattempochangeislinearasa functionof realtime [ Eq.
{ 2b} ]. I will discussthisfurther in the nextsection.The style
parameters
that formarguments
to thefunctionwill depend
onwhattheencodingfunctionisandthewayin whichstructure is coupledto encodingfunction.
Finally, we may alsoassumethat the performanceprocedure,previouslya recursirealgorithminvolvingproceduresof look-aheadand planning (Todd, 1989a), can be
carriedover.This procedurewill ofcoursehaveto bemodified to includethe new variable of intensityand the new
encoding
function,but themainalgorithmwill bethesame.

At =

dx

(4a)

, v(x)

for the continuouscase,which can be estimatedby

At '--Axlv(x),

(4b)

whichgivesriseto anerrorapproximately
-- ( Ax}3a/12.
KronmanandSundberg(1987) attemptedto applythe
LT systemto the finalritardandifrom performances
of 24
pieces,mostlyby J. S. Bach.In thisstudyregression
analyses
werecardedout on the 24 finalritardandiusingthe squareroot functionfor velocityasa functionof metricaldistance
[Eq. (3b) ]. Theyfoundthatthisgavea reasonable
approximationto thedata.Thisanalysis,however,isinadequatefor
the modelingof tempo throughouta whole performance.
The main reasonis that a performanceconsistsof a whole
seriesof accelerandi and ritardandi. So, it is not clear how
one should model the accelerandi or how the accelerandi

should be connected to the ritardandos. Also there is no indi-

cationof how the acceleration

shouldvaryfrom onephrase
to the next. Further, giventhat it is clear that the tempoin
manystylesiscomposed
of the superIgnition
of a numberof
timingcomponents,
thesinglefunctionis incomplete.Finally, the simpleassumption
that tempois equalto inverseduration [Eq. ( 1) ] is problematic(Todd, submitted).
In recentwork on the synthesis
of performances
Longuet-Higginsand Lisle (1989) alsoconcludedthat tempo
shouldbe linear in time within a singleaccelerando
or ritardando [Eq. (2b)] sinceit producesthe most naturally
soundingtempo. They argued {private communication)
that the bestmeansof connectingthe seriesof accelerandi
and ritardandiwasto makethem piecewise
continuous.So
that if one plotted the seriesa kind of sawtoothpattern
would emerge.
In a recentstudy (Todd, submitted)the accelerandiand
ttardandi from completepiano performanceswere examinedusingregression
analysis.The mainconclusionwasthat
the best account of metrical

distance as a function of time

was givenby a seriesof linear, second-order

polynomials
[seeEq. (2c) 1.

B. Unear tempo (LT)

C. Energy, tempo, and intensity

As mentionedabovethere is cvidcnceto suggestthat

expressive
tempovariationislinearin time.Accordingto LT
the variationof tcmpois governedin a manneranalogousto
velocityin theequations
of elementary
mechanics
whicharc
the following:

The abovestudiesthen provideconvincingevidence

that the equationsof elementarymechanicscan be usedto
modelan expressive
changeof tempo.Ratherthan takinga
purelykinematicapproach,however,it is usefulalsoto consider the dynamicsof the situation.That is to considerthe
sequence
of forceswhichgowith anygiventimesequence
of

a(t) = a,

(2a)

u(t) = u + at,

(2b)

x(t) = ut + l/2at 2,

(2c)

a(x) = a,

(3a)

o(x) = (u + 2ax)/2,

(3b)

t(x) = (!/a)[(u + 2ax)' -- u],

(3c)

motions.

where a is acceleration,u is initial tempo,o is tempo,x is

In order to build a new encodingfunctionon this basis

then,let usconsiderthefib groupin a pieceto whichcorrespondsa stereotypical
accelerando/ritardando
shape.Associatedwith thisshapewemayfurtherimaginethemovement
of a particleof massm in a V-shapedpotentialwell of length
Lj (seeFig. 3). Thiscorresponds
to an attractiveforcedirectedtowardsthe centerof the well so that in the region

metricaldistance (measured in units of beatsor bars) and t is

0<X<6j theparticleaccelerates
andin theregion6i <X< !

3543

J. Acoust_
Soc.Am.,Vol. 91, No. 6, June1992

NellP. McAngusTodd:The dynamicsof dynamics

3543

by (9). However,for thesakeof a firstmodelweshalladopt

thissimplification.
D. Strategies for couplingthe structure variable $
x

We nowcometo thequestion
of howto couplethestructurevariableS to thepotentialfunction.Thefunctiongiven
in Eqs.(7) contains
threevariables
& U andX eachofwhich
maybemadeto bea linearfunctionof S suchthat

6 = 60+ %S,
( 1la)
= Uo+c.S,
(llb)
X =Xoj +CxS,
(11c)
where
Xo= x/Li. Thethreetransforms
givenabove
maybe
appliedin any combination
but the simplestcombinations
are the following:

,
FIG. 3. A V-shapedpotentialwell of normalized
lengthI (top) andthe
corresponding
velocity/tempo/intensity
profile(bottom).

theparticle
decelerates
whereX = x/Li isnormalized
distance.Outsidethe well the particlemoveswith constantvelocity.

Let usassumealsothat the total energyE of the system

is constantand is givenby

E = T+ V,

(5)

(a)

ca = cu = Cx = O, no coupling;

(b)

co= Cx= O, potentialdepth shift;

(c)

cu = Cx= O, offsetshift;

(d)

ca = cv = 0, coordinateshift.

With strategy(a) thestructurevariableS isnotcoupledin,

so that the only variablewhich affectsthe expressionis
phraselengthL. Strategy(d), thecoordinate
shift,wasappliedin theearliermodelsof tempo(Todd, 1985,1989a).
With musicaldynamics,however,at leasttwo differentstrategiesappearto beused.Strategy(b), in whichtheposition
of the maximaof intensityis fixedbut the magnitudeof crescendo
is varied,appears
to be usedin the Mozartdataof
Gabrielsson.
Strategy(c), whichis to vary the positionof
the maxima,keepthe heightof the maximaconstantbut
adjusttheslopeof thecrescendo/decrescendo
sothattheconnectedsegments
remainpiecewise
continuous,
appearsto be
usedin the Chopin data.

whereT is the kineticenergyand is givenby

T= -}my
2
and isthepotential
energy
givenby
V+i(x) = U(X/6), 0<X<6,

V_j(x)
=U(1
--X) 6j<X<I,
(1

(6)
(7a)

In mostperformance
datathereareusuallya numberof
components,
fromglobalvariationoverthewholepieceto
local fluctuationsat the note level. Thesecomponentsare

(7b) superimposed
ontoeachother(Todd,1989b,1989c).Thus
thecomplete
functionthat generates
the intensityseriesis

where U is depth of potential.

givenby the following:

From (5) and (6) the velocity(tempo) in the well is

givenby

v (x) =x/(2/m)(E-- V ).

E. The encoding function with N components

(8)

Proposition
(c) suggests
thatintensityandvelocity(tempo)
are coupled.Thereare manyphysicalsystems
in whichin-

v 2K

Ix = /=1

Xj, O<X%<6Jt'

we assumethis relationshipthen

(1

(9)

whichin termsof energygives

V ).

J. Acoust.Soc.Am.,Vol.91, No.6, June1992

V , = U,
-

, 6i,<X%<1,

(13a)
(13b)

where

(10)

This linearrelationship
is of coursean oversimplification
andexamination
of Figs. 1 and 2 showthat the musicaldynamics/tempo
couplingismuchmoresubtlethansuggested
3544

(12)

ponent
thepotentialV,issuchthat

hammer/string
interaction
or a wind/surface
interaction.
If

I = (2K/m)(E-

(E-- V,),

Wherethesubscript
I referstostructuralleoel.For eachcom-

tensityis proportionalto the squareof velocity such as a

L, = Kv},

ml

6, o+ cSi,,
= +
= x% +
NeilP. McAngus
Todd:Thedynamics
of dynamics

(14a)
(

3544

and normalizationrequiresthat

1 =1.

(15)

I=1 ml

IV. EXAMPLES

OF MODEL OUTPUT

In order to seethe modelworkingmore clearlylet us

considera specificexample.
A. Input structure

The simplestthree-componentstructureis a forest of

binary trees in which each member tree has only two
branches(seeFig. 4).
In LISP thisstructurecanbe represented
by
(setqtree '(A B))
(setqA '(a a))

C. Model output for differentcouplingstrategies

In orderto demonstrate
the rangeof differentoutputs,
thesamestructure
isinputfor thefirstthree,.
couplingstrategieswith the followingparametervalues:
(a)

cv=O;

(b)

cv=

(c)

cv=0;

c=0,

--0.5;

c=0,

c=0.1,

and for eachof the threestrategies,

three valuesof o
( 0.3,0.5,0.7
) andthreedifferent
component
weightings
with
ratios [ (6,3,2);(1,1,1);(2,3,6)] are input.Thus,for each
strategy
therearcnineexample
outputsshownin Figs.5-7.

(setqB '(b b))

(setqa '(g4 g4))

(setqb '(g4 g4))
(setqg4 '(1 I I 1)).

Thevaluesof thestructure
variables
L andS corresponding

V. ANALYTIC

METHOD

to this structureare givenby

A. Method

(L,S)j, = (16,0),(16,1),
(L,S)j: = (8,0),(8,1),(8,0),(8,1),
(L,S) = (4,0),(4,1),(4,0),(4,1),(4,0),(4,1),(4,0),(4,1).

Having built a basicmodelfor musicaldynamicswe are

now in a positionto producean analysisof performance
data.The methodadoptedhereis essentiallya kind of analysis/synthesis
but usingperformancedata as the starting
point (Todd, 1989c) (seeFig. 8 ). The basicideaisthat from
the data a guessof the structureand parametersis made.
These can then be fed into the performancealgorithm to
producea simulationof the originaldata. The simulation
can then be comparedto the originaldata usingregression
analysis(Draper and Smith, 1981). This cycleis repeated
until the varianceaccountedfor by the regression
reachesa
criterion of acceptabililty,which in this caseis the variance
accountedfor by a repeatperformance.Obviously,someintuitionis requiredin guessing
a structureandinitial param-

B. Parameter

values

To scaleE and U for a particulardata setwe assume

initially that mr = 1 sothat
E=Imi/2K,

(16a)

Uo= (Im.--Imax)/2K,
2

K= Ima,/v ....

(16b)
(16c)

whereImp,andImaxaretheminimumandmaximumintensitiesoverthe wholepieceand Vma

x is themaximumtempo.
(Obviously,
thereisa degreeof arbitraryness
in thisscaling
method.For example,
an alternative
wayof findinga value
for Uoisto usetheinterquartile
range.) For thesakeof the
example
welettherangeof intensities
andmaximumtempo
beImin= 0, I= = 100,Vmax
= 1 whichimpliesthat E = 0,
Uo= -- ,K = 100.The modelalsorestricts
thenumberof
degrees
of freedomby the followingequalities:

eter values.

The productsof theanalysis

arethefollowing:
(a) A structureand corresponding
valuesof the struc-

turevariables
( (L,S)#[I= 1'" 3};
(b) The styleparameterestimates
E, ( Uo,c ), (t5o,C
a),
and Cx and componentmassesrnt, which are obtainedby
regressing
3

I =/30+ /Ytlt,
l.-1

(17)

where rnt = 1//3t and I

(c) R 2,thevariance
accounted
forby theregression.
B. Analysis of Chopin prelude

Whenthe abovemodeland methodusingstrategy(c)

was appliedto the first performancefrom the Chopin Prelude the structuregivenin Fig. 9 was obtained.The style
parameterestimateswere K = 31, E = 0.40, Uo= -- 0.73,
FIG. 4. A simplethree-layer
treestructure
for theexample.
3545

d. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 91, No. 6, June 1992

5o = 0.58, c = -- 1/3.8, cv = O,cx = 0, whilstregression

gavethe following:
Neil P. McAngusTodd:The dynamicsof dynamics

3545

lOO

$o

8(:1

'k./ ....

/\

t'" \,! '""

,.z, o

',,,f -', [

','x

o /

,/

12

16

20

24

28

32

20

2.4

28

32

28

32

METRICAL
DISTANCE
(BEATS)

METRICAL
DI.'TANCE
(BEA3)

lOO

0.5{111111

lOO

lOO

8o

8o

2O

2O

--- 4o
2O

12

16

20

24

28

32

METRICAL
DISTANCE
(BEATS)

ME'rRICAL
DISTANCE
(BEATS)

0.3{21316/

0.5(213161

! oo

0.7

1 oo

80

8o

3.

3.

2O

40

40

20

2O

0
5

I2

20

24

METRICAL
DISTANCE
(REAT$)

28

32

12

16

20

24

UETRICAL
DIKrANCE
(BEATS)

28

52

12

ME'rR

16

20

24

DISTANCE
(BATS)

FIG.5.Example
outputs
from
themodel
withcoupling
strategy
(a);component
wcightingsratio
of(6,3,2)(toprow),
(1,1,1)(middlerow)and
(2,3,6)(bottom
row);andwith
offset
valus8oofO.
3(tirstcolumn),O.
5
(middlecolumn),and0.7 (third column).

0.3 (e, . 2)

IOO

Ri.CAL DISTANCE
(8;..AIS)

C'TmC*LOSTdCE
(ATS)

0.7{111i !)

0. {11111},

1QO

i\/,,/,,, /...../\!
1
6

uzrrac.. =ST)aCE

o.$ (2. 3. 8}

0.3{=. 3. e

160

-TmCN. C.S?AHC
(.(ATS)

FIG.6. Example
outputs
fromthemodel
withcoupling
strategy
(b) withparameter
values
asinFig.5.

12

le

20

24

3548

)J.IS N3 J.NI

,LLISN3.I.NI

AJ.ISN].LNI

,LLISN31NI

A.ISN3.LNI

L.USN"4_LNI

JJSN3J11

,LilSN3.LNI

LilSN"4_LNI

J. Acoust.Soc. Am.,Vol. 91, No. 6, June 1992

Neil P. McAngusTodd:The dynamicsof dynamics

3548

SIMULATION

VS TWO PERFORMANCES

measurement

evaluation
DATA

SIMULATION

tanalysis

, j STRUCTURE
0

16

24

synthesis

32

40

48

56

64

72

80

88

96

104

112

120

128

BEATS

FIG, 10.The simulation(boldline) corresponding

to theinputstructureas
in Fig. 9 comparedwith the beatintensities
from the two performances
(dotted lines).

FIG. 8. The analysis/synthesis/evaluation

method.

I= 2.70 + 0.196I + 0.37912+ 0.46613

so that the three masses are rn =5.10, rn2=2.64,
rr/3= 2.15. The regressionsatisfiesthe acceptabilitycrite-

rion with R 2 = 74.0% and F(3,124) = 117.42.The resultant simulationis shownin Fig. 10.The simulationis computedusinga recursivealgorithmwrittenin LISP (Todd,
1989c).

(setq
(setq
(setq
(setq
(setq
(setq
(setq
(setq
(setq
(setq
(setq
(setq

g2 '(1 1))
g3 '(1 I 1))
g4 '(1 1 1 1))
g5 '(1 1 1 1 1))
g6 '(1 1 1 1 1 1))
tsr '(A B))
A '((G1G2) G3 G4 as))
B '((G6 G7 G8 G9)
G1 '(g5 g5 g6))
G2 '(g5 g5 g3 g4))
G3 '(g2 g2 g2 g4))
G4 '(g2 g2 g4))
(setq G5 '(g6 g5 g2 g4 g4) )

(setq G6 '(g5 g4 g3))

(setq G? '(g5 g4))
(setq G8 '(g4 g2 g2 g4))
(setq G9 '(g5 g3 g4 g3))
(setq G10 '(g6 g2))
FIG. 9. The LISP implementationof groupingthat corresponds
to the simulation in Fig. 10.
3549

J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 91, No. 6, June 1992

VI. DISCUSSION

The modelof musicaldynamicspresentedin thispaper

wasbasedontwo basicprinciples.First, that musicalexpressionhasits originsin simplemotor actionsandthat the performanceand perceptionof tempo/musicaldynamicsis
basedon an internal senseof motion. Second,that this inter-

nal movementis organizedin a hierarchicalmannercorrespondingto how the groupingor phrasestructureis organizedin the performer'smemory.The modelwasthen used
to developa methodfor the analysisof actualperformance
datawhichenableda compactdescriptionof the data.
It is interestingto speculateon possiblepsychological/
neurophysiological
interpretations
of thismodel.In particular, why doesartificialexpression
basedon motion under
constantaccelerationsoundnatural?One possibleanswer
liesin the ideathat the other fiveorgansof the inner ear, in
additionto thecochlear,namelythesucculeand utriclein the
vestibuleandtheampullain thesemicircular
canals,playan
importantrolein theperceptionof expressive
sounds.Traditionally,it hasbeenthoughtthat theseorgansaresensitiveto
gravity,linear and rotationalaccelerationto producea perceptof self-motionon the vestibularcortex.However,there
is now compellingevidence(Lackner and Graybiel, 1974;
Youngetal., 1977;Kalmijn, 1989;Hudspe[h,1989;Todd,in
press) to supportthe view that theseorgansmay also be
sensitiveto vibrationalphenomena.In otherwordsit maybe
the casethat expressive
soundscaninducea perceptof selfmotion in the listener and that the internal sense of motion

referredto abovemayhaveitsoriginin thecentralvestibular

system.Thus, accordingto this theory, the reasonwhy
expression
basedon the equationsof elementarymechanics
soundsnaturalis that the vestibularsystemevolvedto deal
with preciselythesekindsof motions.
VII. CONCLUSION

Whilst the analysiscarried out in this paper would appearto be convincing,the modeland analyticmethodcannot be properlyevaluateduntil it is carried out on a large
numberof performances
for both tempo and musicaldyNeil P. McAngus Todd: The dynamics of dynamics

3549

namics.Thesefurtheranalysesshouldexaminethe effectsof
tempo, composer and performer style, individual differences,and instrumentchoice.Finally, in additionto the use

of regression,
theresultantsimulations
needsto betestedby
producingsyntheticperformances.

Longnet-Higgins,H. C., and Lisle, E- R. (1989). "Modelling musicengnition." Contemp.MusicRev. 3, 15-27.

Mart, D. (1982). VisiorcA ComputationalInoestigation
into the Human

Representation
and Processing
of VisualInformation(Freeman,San
Francisco).

Repp,
B.H. (1990).
"Patterns
ofexpressive
timing
inperformances
ofa
Beethovenminuetby 19famouspianists,"J. Acoust.Soc.Am. 8, 622641.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Sachs,C. (194). The Riseof Music in the Ancient World East and West
(Dent, London).

of Music(McGraw-Hill, New York).

The'research
presented
inthispaper
wasmade
possible Seashore,C. E. (1938). Psychology

bya SdenceandEngineering
Research
Councilpost-doctoral fellowship.I am alsoindebtedto ChristopherLonguetHigginsfor his ideason lineartempo.

Clarke,E- F. (1988). "Generafive

principles
in musicperformance,"
OeneratioeProcesses
in Music'ThePsychology
ofPerformanee,
Improvisation
and Composition,
editedby I. S!ohoda(Claredon,Oxford).
Clynes,M. (1987). "What cana musicianlearnaboutmusicperformance
from newlydiscoveredmicrostructureprinciples(PM and PAS)?," in
Actionand Perception
in Rhythmand Music,editedby A. Gabriclsson
(Royal SwedishAcademyof Music,Stockholm
), Vol. 55, pp. 201-237.
Draper,N. R., andSmith,H. (191). AppliedRegression
Analysis(Wiley,
New York).

Gabrielsson,
A. (19S7)."Onceagain:ThethemefromMozart'spianoSonatain A Major(K.331)," in ActionandPerception
in RhJthm
andMusic,editedby A. Gabrielsson
( RoyalSwedishAcademyof Music,Stockholm), Vol. 55, pp.81-103.
Helmhoitz,H. L. (1954).OntheSensations
ojrTonensa Physiological
Basis
fora TheoryofMusic(Dover,New York}, 2ndEnglished.of 3rdGerman ed. ( 1st ed. was 1863).

Hudspeth,A. J. (1989). "How the ear's works work," Nature 341, 397404.

Kalmijn, A. J. (1989). "Functionalevolutionof lateralline and inn,rear

sensorysystems,"in The Mechanosensory
Lateral Lin' Neurobtblogy

andEoolution,
editedbyS.Conrobes,
P.Gfrner,andH. Mfinz(SpringerVerlag, New York).
Kronman,U., andStmdberg,J. ( 1987}. "Is themusicalritard an allusionto

physicalmotion?,"inActionandPerception
in RhythmandMusic,edited
by A. Gabrielsson
( RoyalSwedishAcademyof Music,Stockholm),Vol.
55, pp. 57-68.
Lackner,I. R., and Graybiel, A. ( 1974}. "Elicitation of vestibularsideeffectsby regionalvibrationof the head,"Aerosp.Meal.45, 1267-1272.

3550

J. Acoust.Soc.Am.,Vol.91, No.6, June1992

Shaffer,L. H. (1981). "Performancesof Chopin, Bach and Beethoven:

Studiesin motorprogramming,"CognitiveSci. 13, 326-376.
Shaffer,L. H., and Todd, N. P. (1987). "The interpretivecomponentin
musicalperformance,"in Actionand Perception
in Rhythmand Music,
edited by A. Crabrielsson(Royal SwedishAcademy of Music, Stockholm), Vol. 55, pp. 139-152.
Sloboda,I. A. (1983). "The communicationof musicalmeterin pianoperformance,"Q. I. Exp. Psychol.8g, 377-396.
Stetson,R. ( 1905}. "A motor theoryof discretesuccession,"
Psychol.Rev.
12, 250-350.

Sundberg,I. (1988). "Computersynthesis

of musicperformance,"
in GenerotiveProcesses
in Music' ThePsychology
of Performance,
Improvisation
and Composition,
editedby . SIoboda(Clarendon,Oxford}.
Sundberg,J., and Verillo, V. (1980). "On the anatomyof the retard: A
studyof timing in music,"J. AcousCSoc.Am. 68, 772-779.
Todd, N. P. McA. (195). "A modelof expressive
timingin tonalmusic,"
Music Percep.3, 33-58.
Todd, N. P. McA. (1989a). "A computational
modelof tempo,"Contemp.
Music Rev. 3, 69-88.

Todd,N. P. McA. (1989). "Towardsa cognitive

theoryofexpression:
The
performance
and perceptionof tempo,"Contemp.MusicRev. 4, 405416.

Todd, N. P. McA. (19e). "ComputationalTheoryandImplementations

of an Abstract ExpressionSystem:A Contributionto Computational
Psychomusicology,"
Ph.D. thesis,Univemityof Exeter.
Todd, N. P. McA. (1990). "Computational
modellingof musicalexpression," Proceedings
of the International ComputerMusic Conference
(Computer Music Association,San Francisco),pp. 373-375.
Todd, N. P. McA. (sabmitted)."The kinematicsof musicalexpression,"
J.
Acoust. Sac. Am.

Todd, N. P. McA. (in iratere)."The communicationof self-motionin musi-

calexpression,"
Proceedings
of theInternationalWorkshop
onMan-MachineInteractionin LioePerformance
(ComputerMusicDepartmentof
CNUCE/CNR,

Pisa, Italy).

Young,E. D., Fernandez,C., and Goldberg,i. M. (1977). "Responses

of
squirrelmonkeyvestibularneuronsto audio-frequency
soundand head
vibration,"Acta. Otolasyngol.84, 352-360.

NeilP. McAtxjus
Todd:Thedynamics
of dynamics

3550