Accent Structures in Music Performance

Abstract

Perceptual studies suggest that the segmentation of a musical sequence is influenced by three accent structures: rhythmic grouping, melodic, and metric accent structures. We investigate whether performers emphasize these types of accents with systematic performance variations (intensity, interonset timing, and articulation). In three experiments, skilled pianists performed sequences of various musical complexities: simple sequences containing only one accent structure (Experiment 1), more complex sequences containing coinciding or conflicting accent structures (Experiment 2), and a concert pianist's performance of a sonata containing coinciding and conflicting accent structures (Experiment 3). In all three musical contexts, similar systematic performance variations were observed in relation to each type of accent. Variations corresponding to rhythmic grouping accents were most consistent across musical contexts and dominated when the accent structures conflicted. These findings suggest perceptual correlates for the accent structures in music performance that may facilitate listeners' segmentation of musical sequences.

Accenting and detection of timing variations in tone sequences: Different kinds of accents have different effects

“…However, the larger effect of accenting on positive deviations, which was observed in Experiment 1, was not observed in Experiment 2. The finding that positive deviations, which would be expected in performance (Drake & Palmer, 1993), were made difficult to detect to a greater extent, as compared with negative deviations, is just the opposite of the results of Experiment 1. As such, it is more consistent with hearing these intervals as shorter than they were, which was the prediction of the compensation hypothesis.…”

“…In Experiment 2, positive deviations, which would be expected in performance (Drake & Palmer, 1993), were made difficult to detect to a greater extent, whereas negative deviations, which would be unexpected, were affected less. There are some findings in the literature that seem to be contradictory with this.…”

“…Structural cognition is assumed to be under voluntary control, whereas auditory processing and structural perception are not (Repp, 1998). The fact that performers use some expressive variation even when they are instructed to perform mechanically (Drake & Palmer, 1993;Gabrielsson, 1974;Penel & Drake, 1998) indicates that structural cognition may be only partially responsible for the variations in perception and performance of music.…”

“…This points to an interesting possibility about expressive variations in performance. It is known that some variation in the timing of notes is observed even when performers are instructed to play without any expression (Drake & Palmer, 1993;Gabrielsson, 1974;Penel & Drake, 1998). This may be because performers deviate from a uniform tempo, in part, because they are unable to detect these deviations.…”

“…Earlier research has also indicated that detecting deviations in IOIs is more difficult when the IOIs correspond to pitch jumps that separate two groups of different pitches than when they do not separate perceptual groups (Drake, 1993;Thorpe & Trehub, 1989;Thorpe et al, 1988). Drake and Palmer (1993) found that melodically accented notes were separated from the preceding notes by longer IOIs in the performance of simple sequences and real music. Penel and Drake (1998) replicated the finding in cases in which pitch jumps did not coincide with conflicting structural features.…”