Scale resources

In responding to the comment by Steven Hall to the post below, I was curious as to what other resources are out there about musical scales. I found an interesting site called Dolmetsch Online, which includes a listing of 1000+ scales from around the world. It cannot identify scales by inputting the notes, but it can list the notes for any given scale starting on any given pitch, and lists the related scale topics below. So inputting starting note D for an Ahava Rabba (Jewish) scale, the music notation lists the scale in C, and below gives the notes for the scale starting on D. And below that, links to internet sites on Pentatonic scales, Japanese Scales, Yo Scale, Modes, etc. It's too bad the music notation doesn't change with the transposition, but it is an interesting resource.

How not to research about music

Wolfram Alpha has been big in the news as a possible Google killer. The idea is that specific questions are answered, with an emphasis on mathematical calculations. However, the music section leaves much to be desired. Where are the matrix makers, or PC set calculators? The theory is so basic, it barely gets to the level of the third week of a music fundamentals class (the addition of non-Western scales is pretty cool). This is an example of the lack of respect or understanding many scientists have about the complexity of music theory. I'm reading Fred Lerdahl's Tonal Pitch Space right now, which is full of formulas that could be incorporated into a true Wolfram Alpha music section. Or even giving all of the possible neo-Riemannian transformations that connect two chords would be great. The section on the frequency of pitches would be interesting if it included differences based on tuning systems. But calculating interval sizes by rudimentary means? Boring.

The Digital Phoenix

Via Scott, the International Music Score Library Project (IMSLP) will be resurrected on July 1. Read here for details on why it shut down in the first place.

Music for coping

When children are being treated for cancer, they usually need help to cope with all of the stress and emotions that are engendered. A study by Indiana University's School of Nursing (along with many contributing institutions/authors) investigated three environmental conditions on cancer patients ages 4-7: active music engagement (AME), music listening (ML), and audio storybooks (ASB). Active Music Engagement is a program that involves playing hand held instruments and singing action songs like "Five Little Monkeys" to allow the patients to work out stress and pain. It's been used as music therapy for burn patients and pain management, and relationships between patients with dementia and their spousal caregivers. This study found that the patients who received the AME had significantly higher coping behaviors than the other two conditions (ML and ASB). These coping behaviors were positive facial effect, active engagement with others, and initiation of activities. Initiation of activities was about equal for both music conditions, significantly greater than the storybook listeners.

Sherri L. Robb, et al. "Randomized controlled trial of the active music engagement (AME) intervention on children with cancer." Psycho-Oncology (Nov. 21, 2007 online).

IUPUI article, TherapyTimes article.

Heading to Groningen

I just found out that my proposed paper was accepted to the 9th International Conference of the Dutch-Flemish Society for Music Theory. As the link indicates, the subject of the conference is Improvisation: Analytical, Theoretical, and Critical Approaches". I'll include the abstract for my paper below, and would appreciate any questions or comments.

The ultimate goal of any improvisation pedagogy is the engendering of quick creativity. The ability to create with innovation and coherence is developed through the development of various cognitive skills. The improvisation pedagogy presented is based upon recent
cognitive studies, identifying what skills are necessary and how best to develop them. This method for stylistically-neutral improvisation is intended to fit within a core two-year aural skills sequence in post-secondary studies. Students learn to improvise in a collaborative environment, one that also encourages the development of keyboard skills. Working in pairs, the performers trade soloing and accompanying duties. This provides a safer environment for exploration, and frees the professor to evaluate performances. It also provides varied experiences from the different duties and from the alterations and imperfections inserted by the partner during practice. Studies such as Pressing (1984), Berliner (1994), Sarath (1996), Johnson-Laird (2002), and Mendonça and Wallace (2004) have stressed the importance of temporal cognition in improvised performance. Thus rhythmic and metric accuracy is placed at the forefront of this improvisation pedagogy. Memory is also a key component of improvisation. Performers must be able to remember what they already played and the form of the improvisation. Kenny and Gellrich (2002) describe eight cognitive processes during improvisation, including three temporal levels each of recall and anticipation. Memorization of self-composed melodies and mimicking exercises help to develop these skills. Sarath's (1996) concept of cognitive event cycles is taken as an important measure of improvement. Greater frequencies of cognitive events, as measured through numbers of possible solutions to a given musical event, give rise to more creative responses to stimulus from the improviser and from collaborators. This is evidenced by variety demonstrated in multiple performances of the same exercise. Pressing (2000) provides an estimate of the expected limits for "improvisational novelty" at ten actions per second, based upon error correction times measured by Welford (1976). This paper summarizes the various cognitive models of improvisation and the framework for the pedagogical system. Sample exercises are demonstrated for both instructional and assessment purposes.

Berliner, Paul. 1994. Thinking in Jazz.
Johnson-Laird, P.N. 2002. How jazz musicians improvise. Music Perception 19(3), 415-442.
Kenny and Gellrich
Mendonça, David, and William A. Wallace. 2004. Cognition in jazz improvisation: an exploratory study. 26th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society.
Pressing, Jeff. 1984. Cognitive processes in improvisation. In Cognitive processes in the perception of art, (ed. W.R. Crozier and A.J. Chapman). North-Holland, Amsterdam.
Pressing. 2000. Improvisation: methods and models. In Generative processes in music.
Sarath, Edward. 1996. A new look at improvisation. Journal of Music Theory, Vol 40, No. 1, 1-38.
Welford, A.T. 1976. Skilled Performance.

Classical Recordings: I'm not dead yet!

I'll admit it, I was the skeptical college professor mentioned by Eric Edberg. After that talk, I also did some googling. Searching the RIAA website, I found their Research and Data site, with total sales and Consumer Profiles. First, the whole recording industry has gone through a cycle in the last ten years. In 1996 $12.5 billion of recordings were sold*. In 2005 $12.3 billion were sold. The high point was in 1999 ($14.6 billion), during the crazy days of Amazon free shipping. The low was in 2003 ($11.9 billion). Classical recording sales has followed the same trend through this time, maintaining a rather constant 3% of market share. In digital sales, however, the Classical genre does much better. As a Guardian article from last spring points out, classical music accounts for 12% of iTunes sales. And 2005 Year-End Statistics for RIAA show that the recording market started in an upward trend after 2003 when download sales started being recorded. But this is sales, not production.

I couldn't find any industry-wide data, but I looked at Deutsche Grammaphon's catalog to tally their number of releases each year. Here it is:
Year # of releases
1982 8
1983 18
1984 29
1985 38
1986 19
1987 75
1988 52
1989 72
1990 56
1991 39
1992 53
1993 72
1994 86
1995 120
1996 90
1997 88
1998 94
1999 109
2000 85
2001 77
2002 116
2003 129
2004 145
2005 235
2006 273

A very steady upward climb, with the normal fluctuations expected from a random walk (so I understand from some Econ colleagues). Granted, the huge increase in 2005 and 2006 include re-releases as DG (and all the other record labels) rush to digitize their back catalog. But even so, there are plenty of new releases in these last two years as well. Finally, I point to a relatively old Wired article on the Long Tail. I think too many of my colleagues and their acquaintances are still thinking in the old brick-n-mortor economic mentality, including the speaker from last night. The new digital economy allows for niche markets to thrive, including the various Classical niches. Independent labels such as Canteloupe have taken off, with great access through Amazon, iTunes, eTunes, etc.

I will agree that the major labels did cut many of their artists during the late 90's, probably most from panic when sales temporarily levelled off in 1997. As Greg Sandow (via Eric) points out, Classical recordings did rely upon subsidies, so cutting high-priced artists would shave some expenses, at least from a knee-jerk middle-manager perspective. But I will have to see conclusive data refuting what I have seen, to convince me that the Classical recording industry has indeed died. So consider this a bleg, repeating what Eric asks for: actual statistics along the lines of: "In 1980, there were X new classical releases; in 1990, Y; in 2000 Z; etc."



*Estimated, based on shipping data.