Bauhaus-Universität Weimar

210 
Psychology of Music 
we find that A underholds the first note 0.5 second, and B is not 
recorded. A plays the second note +.05; whereas, B plays it in 
metronomic time. + plays the third note +.15 seconds and B — .2. 
+ plays the fourth note — .7 and B — A. A plays the fifth note in 
metronomic time, and B —.15, etc. 
These phrasing scores are a mine of information. In this sym¬ 
bolic language, we can now discuss any fundamental issue involved 
in phrasing or general interpretation. 
In rhythm, for example, we see how each performer expresses 
himself. We can put various theories of rhythm to the acid test. 
We can discover principles of rhythm hitherto unrecognized. 
Perhaps the most interesting revelation in these figures is the 
light they throw on the nature of accent, showing how each 
player renders his primary and secondary accent in terms of time 
and intensity. 
Thus it is evident that ultimately the performance score must 
be transcribed into a phrasing score for ready comparison and 
interpretation in musical terminology. We see here a very vivid 
picture of the differences in a section of the two renditions of the 
Ave Maria. While the graphs are expressed in quantitative terms, 
these must be translated into the terminology of the conventional 
musical interpretation of phrasing. In these scores we see in accu¬ 
rate detail the various forms and degrees of accent for phrase 
patterns in terms of three media. The reader would find it profitable 
to take these examples and study one factor at a time in their 
complex forms, such as rhythm, volume, tempo, in the patterns 
of each of the three media. 
Similar scores are shown for Small’s Air for the G String (Fig. 5) 
and Menuhin’s Tzigane (Fig. 6). Similar phrasings in time and 
intensity, not including pitch, are shown for Elman’s rendition of 
the Air for the G String (Fig. 7), which is comparable with Small’s 
(Fig. 5) and Small’s second rendition of the same selection (Fig. 8). 
Figures 5 and 8 furnish interesting material for comparison of the 
phrasing in two renditions of the same selection by the same 
player. 
After this acquaintance with the reading and interpretation 
of performance and phrasing scores, we may profitably summarize 
Small’s findings on basic issues involved in pitch, intensity, time, 
and timbre scores in turn.
        

Nutzerhinweis

Sehr geehrte Benutzer,

aufgrund der aktuellen Entwicklungen in der Webtechnologie, die im Goobi viewer verwendet wird, unterstützt die Software den von Ihnen verwendeten Browser nicht mehr.

Bitte benutzen Sie einen der folgenden Browser, um diese Seite korrekt darstellen zu können.

Vielen Dank für Ihr Verständnis.