Using Geometric Symbolic Fingerprinting to Discover Distinctive Patterns in Polyphonic Music Corpora

  • Tom Collins
  • Andreas Arzt
  • Harald Frostel
  • Gerhard Widmer
Chapter

Abstract

Did Ludwig van Beethoven (1770–1827) re-use material when composing his piano sonatas? What repeated patterns are distinctive of Beethoven’s piano sonatas compared, say, to those of Frédéric Chopin (1810–1849)? Traditionally, in preparation for essays on topics such as these, music analysts have undertaken inter-opus pattern discovery—informally or systematically—which is the task of identifying two or more related note collections (or phenomena derived from those collections, such as chord sequences) that occur in at least two different movements or pieces of music. More recently, computational methods have emerged for tackling the inter-opus pattern discovery task, but often they make simplifying and problematic assumptions about the nature of music. Thus a gulf exists between the flexibility music analysts employ when considering two note collections to be related, and what algorithmic methods can achieve. By unifying contributions from the two main approaches to computational pattern discovery—viewpoints and the geometric method—via the technique of symbolic fingerprinting, the current chapter seeks to reduce this gulf. Results from six experiments are summarized that investigate questions related to borrowing, resemblance, and distinctiveness across 21 Beethoven piano sonata movements. Among these results, we found 2–3 bars of material that occurred across two sonatas, an andante theme that appears varied in an imitative minuet, patterns with leaps that are distinctive of Beethoven compared to Chopin, and two potentially new examples of what Meyer and Gjerdingen call schemata. The chapter does not solve the problem of inter-opus pattern discovery, but it can act as a platform for research that will further reduce the gap between what music informaticians do, and what musicologists find interesting.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arzt, A., Böck, S., and Widmer, G. (2012). Fast identification of piece and score position via symbolic fingerprinting. In Proceedings of the 13th International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference (ISMIR 2012), pages 433–438, Porto.Google Scholar
  2. Barlow, H. and Morgenstern, S. (1948). A Dictionary of Musical Themes. Crown Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. Burkholder, J. (2001). Borrowing. In Sadie, S. and Tyrrell, J., editors, The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Macmillan, 2nd edition.Google Scholar
  4. Byros, V. (2012). Meyer’s anvil: Revisiting the schema concept. Music Analysis, 31(3):273–346.Google Scholar
  5. Cambouropoulos, E. (2006). Musical parallelism and melodic segmentation. Music Perception, 23(3):249–267.Google Scholar
  6. Caplin, W. (2013). Analyzing Classical Form: An Approach for the Classroom. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Collins, T. (2011). Improved methods for pattern discovery in music, with applications in automated stylistic composition. PhD thesis, Faculty of Mathematics, Computing and Technology, The Open University.Google Scholar
  8. Collins, T. (2014). Stravinsqi/De Montfort University at the MediaEval 2014 C@meratatask. In Proceedings of the MediaEval 2014 Workshop, Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
  9. Collins, T., Arzt, A., Flossmann, S., and Widmer, G. (2013). SIARCT-CFP: Improving precision and the discovery of inexact musical patterns in point-set representations. In Proceedings of the 14th International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference (ISMIR 2014), pages 549–554, Curitiba, Brazil.Google Scholar
  10. Collins, T., Laney, R., Willis, A., and Garthwaite, P. H. (2011). Modeling pattern importance in Chopin’s mazurkas. Music Perception, 28(4):387–414.Google Scholar
  11. Collins, T., Thurlow, J., Laney, R., Willis, A., and Garthwaite, P. (2010). A comparative evaluation of algorithms for discovering translational patterns in baroque keyboard works. In Proceedings of the 11th International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference (ISMIR 2010), pages 3–8, Utrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  12. Conklin, D. (2010). Discovery of distinctive patterns in music. Intelligent Data Analysis, 14(5):547–554.Google Scholar
  13. Conklin, D. and Bergeron, M. (2008). Feature set patterns in music. Computer Music Journal, 32(1):60–70.Google Scholar
  14. Conklin, D. and Bergeron, M. (2010). Discovery of contrapuntal patterns. In Proceedings of the 11th International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference (ISMIR 2010), pages 201–206, Utrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  15. Forth, J. C. (2012). Cognitively-motivated geometric methods of pattern discovery and models of similarity in music. PhD thesis, Department of Computing,Goldsmiths, University of London.Google Scholar
  16. Gjerdingen, R. (1988). A Classic Turn of Phrase: Music and the Psychology of Convention. University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  17. Gjerdingen, R. (2007). Music in the Galant Style. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Janssen, B., de Haas, W. B., Volk, A., and van Kranenburg, P. (2013). Discovering repeated patterns in music: state of knowledge, challenges, perspectives. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer Music Multidisciplinary Research (CMMR 2013), pages 225–240, Marseille.Google Scholar
  19. Knopke, I. and Jürgensen, F. (2009). A system for identifying common melodic phrases in the masses of Palestrina. Journal of New Music Research, 38(2):171–181.Google Scholar
  20. Lartillot, O. (2005). Multi-dimensional motivic pattern extraction founded on adaptive redundancy filtering. Journal of New Music Research, 34(4):375–393.Google Scholar
  21. Lewin, D. (1987). Generalized Musical Intervals and Transformations. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Lutes, L. (1974). Beethoven’s re-uses of his own compositions. PhD thesis, Department of Music, University of Southern California.Google Scholar
  23. Marston, N. (1995). Beethoven’s Piano Sonata in E, op. 109. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  24. Meredith, D. (2006). The ps13 pitch spelling algorithm. Journal of New Music Research, 35(2):121–159.Google Scholar
  25. Meredith, D., Lemström, K., and Wiggins, G. A. (2002). Algorithms for discovering repeated patterns in multidimensional representations of polyphonic music. Journal of New Music Research, 31(4):321–345.Google Scholar
  26. Meyer, L. (1980). Exploiting limits: creation, archetypes, and style change. Daedalus, 109(2):177–205.Google Scholar
  27. Pardo, B. and Birmingham,W. P. (2002). Algorithms for chordal analysis. Computer Music Journal, 26(2):27–49.Google Scholar
  28. Pearce, M., Ruiz, M., Kapasi, S., Wiggins, G., and Bhattacharya, J. (2010). Unsupervised statistical learning underpins computational, behavioural, and neural manifestations of musical expectation. Neuroimage, 50:302–313.Google Scholar
  29. Pearson, K. (1909). On a new method of determining correlation between a measured character a, and a character b, of which only the percentage of cases wherein b exceeds (or falls short of) a given intensity is recorded for each grade of a. Biometrika, 7(1–2):96–105.Google Scholar
  30. Pielou, E. and Foster, R. (1962). A test to compare the incidence of disease in isolated and crowded trees. Canadian Journal of Botany, 40:1176–1179.Google Scholar
  31. Radcliffe, P. (1968). Beethoven’s String Quartets. E.P. Dutton.Google Scholar
  32. Roberts, J. (1986). Handel’s borrowing from Keiser. Göttinger Händel-Beiträge, 2:51–76.Google Scholar
  33. Wang, A.-C. and Smith, J. (2012). System and methods for recognizing sound and music signals in high noise and distortion. Patent US 8,190,435 B2. Continuation of provisional application from 2000.Google Scholar
  34. Winemiller, J. (1997). Recontextualizing Handel’s borrowing. The Journal of Musicology, 15(4):444–470.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tom Collins
    • 1
  • Andreas Arzt
    • 2
  • Harald Frostel
    • 2
  • Gerhard Widmer
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of TechnologyDe Montfort UniversityLeicesterUK
  2. 2.Department of Computational PerceptionJohannes Kepler UniversityLinzAustria

Personalised recommendations