Yale University Department of Music

Coordination of Interval Sizes in Seven-Tone Collections

Author(s): Jay Rahn
Source: Journal of Music Theory, Vol. 35, No. 1/2 (Spring - Autumn, 1991), pp. 33-60
Published by: Duke University Press on behalf of the Yale University Department of Music
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/843809 .
Accessed: 15/12/2014 14:33

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Duke University Press and Yale University Department of Music are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to Journal of Music Theory.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
COORDINATION OF INTERVAL SIZES

IN SEVEN-TONE COLLECTIONS

Jay Rahn

In the Appendix to his book on The Structureof Atonal Music,

Allen Forte lists 38 seven-pc subsets of the twelve-semitone set (1973
and cf. 1964). These 38 seven-tone sets are listed in Figure 1. In the
present study, each of these 38 7-pc subsets of the twelve-semitone
aggregate is referred to as a "seven-tone collection."
In recent years, much attention has been paid to seven-tone col-
lections in general and in particularto the so-called "diatonic collec-
tion." (The diatonic collection is 7-35 in Forte's numbering,which is
followed in Figure 1.) Authors who have dealt with the diatonic col-
lection include Eric Regener (1974: 199-201), Robert Cogan and
Pozzi Escot (1976: 140-41), Richmond Browne (1981), Robert Gaul-
din (1983), John Clough and Gerald Myerson (1985: 249-62), and,
most recently, Richard Cohn (1988: 29-30). The so-called "chromatic
heptachord"(7-1 in Forte's numbering)has also been studied, notably
and in connection with so-called "deep scales," by Milton Babbitt
(1965: 54), Hubert S. Howe (1965: 52), and CarltonGamer (1967: 39-
46). As well, RichmondBrowne (1981: 5, 9) has remarked,in passing,
on what might be termed the "harmonicminor collection" (7-32) and
what could be called the "ascendingmelodic minor collection" (7-34).

33

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7-1 0 12 3 4 5 6 7-20 0 12 4 7 8 9
7-2 0123457 7-21 0124589
7-3 1123458 7-22 0125689
7-4 0123467 7-23 0234579
7-5 0123567 7-24 0123579
7-6 0123478 7-25 0234679
7-7 0123678 7-26 0134579
7-8 0234568 7-27 0124579
7-9 0123468 7-28 0135679
7-10 0 12 3 4 6 9 7-29 0 12 4 6 7 9
7-11 0134568 7-30 0124689
7-12 0 12 3 4 7 9 7-31 0134679
7-13 0 12 4 5 6 8 7-32 0 13 4 6 8 9
7-14 0 12 3 5 7 8 7-33 0 12 4 6 8 10
7-15 0 12 4 6 7 8 7-34 0 13 4 6 8 10
7-16 0 12 3 5 6 9 7-35 01356810
7-17 01 245 69 7-36 0123568
7-18 0 12 3 5 8 9 7-37 0134578
7-19 0 12 3 6 7 9 7-38 0124578

Figure 1. 38 seven-pc subsets of twelve-pc aggregate.

Seven-tone collections have been approached in three distinct

ways. In the first way, intervals are discussed purely in terms of semi-
tone sizes, or what Clough and Myerson (1985: 249) have referred to
as "specific"interval sizes. Noteworthy in this vein have been contri-
butions by Babbitt (1965), Howe (1965), Gamer (1967), Regener
(1974), Cogan and Escot (1976), and Browne (1981). In the second
way of approachingseven-tone collections, intervals are described in
terms of numbers of scale degrees, or what Clough and Myerson
(1985: 249, again) have defined as "generic" interval sizes. Of impor-
tance in this area have been publications by Regener (1974 after
Kassler), Clough (1979 and 1980), and Clough and Myerson (1985). In
the third way of approachingseven-tone collections, intervals are dis-
cussed in terms of connections between the numbersof semitones and
the numbers of scale degrees between any given pair of pitches or
pitch classes. Clough and Myerson's fairly recent article on "Variety
and Multiplicityin Diatonic Systems" (1985) adopts this approach as
does my article on "Constructs for Modality" (1978). The present
study also adopts this third approach to seven-tone collections. In
other words, I investigate connections between generic and specificin-
terval sizes, that is, connections between the sizes of intervals ex-
pressed in terms of scale degrees and semitones.
As my first step, I describe ordered pitch-classintervals (following
John Rahn's nomenclature, 1980: 25-26) and what might be termed

34

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
"$ordereddegree-class intervals" for each of the thirty-eight seven-
tone collections. For example, in Figure 2, which is based on the dia-
tonic collection (7-35), one can observe that the intervalsE-F and B-C
comprise one semitone (i.e., an ordered pc intervalof 1) and one scale
degree (i.e., what might be termed an ordered dc intervalof 1). More-
over, the intervals C-D, D-E, F-G, G-A and A-B are made up of two
semitones (an ordered pitch-class interval of 2) and one scale degree
(an ordered degree-class interval of one). And so forth. In Figure 2,
this approach gives rise to what might be termed, informally, an "or-
dered pc-dc vector" corresponding to the following numbers (at the
right of Figure 2): 2 5 4 3 6 1 1 6 3 4 5 2. In Figure 3, a quite different
seven-tone collection, correspondingto the notes C, D), E, F GK, A
and B (a member of Forte's set class 7-19), is described in this way,
and the ordered pc-dc vector which results offers quite a contrast:4 1
2 2 13 1 1 3 3 3 etc.
I am particularlyconcerned in the present study with three situa-
tions. In the first situation, two pairs of ordered pitch classes have a
single generic size but have different specificsizes. For example, in the
diatonic collection (see Figure 2), C-E and D-F have the single generic
size of 2 scale degrees (insofar as they are so-called "thirds"),but they
have different specific sizes: 4 semitones for C-E and 3 semitones for
D-F. This sort of difference, which I call merely a "difference," cor-

scale degrees: semitones: intervals: number of

intervals:
1 1 E-F, B-C 2
1 2 C-D, D-E, F-G, G-A, 5
A-B
2 3 D-F, E-G, A-C, B-D 4
2 4 C-E, F-A, G-B 3
3 5 C-F, D-G, E-A, G-C, 6
A-D, B-E
3 6 F-B 1
4 6 B-F 1
4 7 C-G, D-A, E-B, F-C, 6
G-D, A-E
5 8 E-C, A-F, B-G 3
5 9 C-A, D-B, F-D, G-E 4
6 10 D-C, E-D, G-F, A-G, 5
B-A
6 11 C-B, F-E 2
Figure 2. Sizes of intervals in diatonic collection C, D, E, F, G, A, B
in terms of scale degrees and semitones.

35

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
responds to the distinction between, for example, a major third and a
minor third in tonal and modal theory. Although C-E and D-F are
both thirds, they are different sorts of thirds.
In the second situation, two pairs of ordered pitch classes have the
same specific sizes but differing generic sizes. For example, in the dia-
tonic collection of Figure 2, F-B and B-F have the same specific size,
6 semitones; whereas they have different generic sizes, 3 and 4 scale
degrees, respectively (insofar as the first is a fourth and the second a
fifth). This sort of difference, which I call an "ambiguity," corre-
sponds to the distinction in tonal and modal theory between an aug-
mented fourth on the one hand and a diminished fifth on the other
hand. Whereas an augmented fourth and diminished fifth both have
six semitones, they differ in the numbers of scale degrees they com-
prise.
In the third, and final, situation, there are two pairs of ordered
pitch classes which might be named x and y, such that x is greater than
y in terms of semitones and y is greater than x in terms of scale de-
grees. For example, in Figure 3, where one is concerned with the C,
DO,E, F, GK,A, B collection, one finds that the pair of ordered pitch
classes D#-F is smaller than in terms of semitones, but Dt-F is
G6,-A
bigger than G6-A in terms of scale degrees. The interval Dt#-Fhas 2
semitones as compared with the 3 semitones in G6-A, but DO-Fhas 2
scale degrees as compared with the single scale degree of G6-A. I
refer to this sort of situation as a "contradiction,"or by the less in-
flammatoryterm "opposition." In circumstancesof this sort, a given
pair of ordered pitch classes forms an interval that is bigger than an-
other in terms of semitones but smallerthan the other in terms of scale
degrees. Hence, the contradictionor opposition. I will also note that
in a typology whereby two pairs of ordered pitch classes are consid-
ered to embody a difference, an ambiguityor a contradiction, all pos-
sibilities of what might be termed heteromorphism are exhausted if
intervals are compared generically and specificallyin terms of "same-
as" and "greater-than"relations. The only other category that might
be entertained comprises pairs of ordered pitch classes that are iden-
tical in terms of both semitones and scale degrees, and one might refer
to such situations as instances of identity or matchingor strict isomor-
phism. Such isomorphisms occur (pairwise) among D-F, E-G, A-C
and B-D and among C-E, F-A and G-B in the C, D, E, F, G, A, B
collection.
The ways in which contradictions, ambiguities and differences
might be counted include multiplicationand addition. For the C DOE
F G6 A B collection (i.e., 7-19 in Figure 3), there are two augmented-
second intervals(C-D t and Gb-A) that contradictthe two diminished-
thirdintervals (D#-F and This situation gives rise to 2 x 2 = 4
E-G,).
36

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
scale degrees: semitones: intervals: number of
intervals:
1 1 DO-E, E-F, F-GI, B-C 4
1 2 A-B 1
1 3 C-DO, Gb-A 2
2 2 D#-F, 2
2 3 A-C E-G, 1
2 4 C-E, F-A, B-DOt 3
2 5 Gb-B 1
3 3 1
3 5 DO-G,
C-F, E-A, B-E 3
3 6 F-B, A-DO 3
4 6 C-GK,G,-C,
D#-A, B-F 3
4 7 E-B, F-C, A-E 3
4 9 G6-DO 1
5 7 B-G, 1
5 8 DO-B, E-C, A-F 3
5 9 C-A 1
5 10 F-D#, 2
6 9 DO-C,G,-E
A-Gb 2
6 10 B-A 1
6 11 C-B, E-DO, F-E, Gb-F 4

Figure 3. Sizes of intervals in C, DO, E, F, G6, A, B collection in

terms of scale degrees and semitones.

contradictions. Altogether, there are sixteen such contradictions

among the ordered pc-dc intervals of this collection. Further, there is
one major second in this collection (A-B in Figure 3), and there are
two diminished thirds (Dt-F and These intervals give rise to
1 x 2 = 2 ambiguities. In all, thereE-G,).
are 27 ambiguitiesin the 7-19 col-
lection. Finally, there are three types of second in 7-19: 4 ordered
pitch-classpairs belong to the first type, 1 to the second, and 2 to the
third. Among these ordered pitch-class pairs, then, there are
(4 x 1) + (4 x 2) + (1 x 2) = 14 differences. In sum, for the 7-19
collection, there are 92 such differences. Figure 4 summarizesthe re-
sults that obtain for all 38 7-tone collections. (On the counting of re-
lations in general, see Jay Rahn 1985.)
The only 7-tone collections that contain no instance of contradic-
tion are the diatonic collection (7-35), what might be called the as-
cending melodic minor collection (7-34), the so-called harmonicminor
collection (7-32), and a collection that could be termed either a whole
tone scale with a filler tone or a Neapolitan (or Phrygian) ascending
melodic minor (7-33). I feel that these four collections are highly

37

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
number pitch classes number of number of number of
of subset: in subset: contradic- ambiguities: differences:
tions:
1 0 12 3 4 5 6 42 1 32
2 0 12 3 4 5 7 43 20 66
3 0 12 3 4 5 8 46 12 66
4 0 12 3 4 6 7 48 22 78
5 0 12 3 5 6 7 57 20 84
6 0 12 3 4 7 8 32 18 78
7 0 12 3 6 7 8 22 26 84
8 0 2 3 4 5 6 8 44 28 84
9 0 12 3 4 6 8 36 34 92
10 0 12 3 4 6 9 35 32 92
11 0 13 4 5 6 8 46 27 92
12 0 12 3 4 7 9 28 22 84
13 0 12 4 5 6 8 41 26 90
14 0 12 3 5 7 8 27 38 102
15 0 12 4 6 7 8 18 35 96
16 0 12 3 5 6 9 32 36 102
17 0 12 4 5 6 9 25 33 96
18 0 12 3 5 8 9 23 32 100
19 0 12 3 6 7 9 16 27 92
20 0 12 4 7 8 9 10 26 90
21 0 12 4 5 8 9 7 33 90
22 0 12 5 6 8 9 4 22 84
23 0 2 3 4 5 7 9 26 42 104
24 0 12 3 5 7 9 19 37 102
25 0 2 3 4 6 7 9 19 28 92
26 0 13 4 5 7 9 13 34 98
27 0 12 4 5 7 9 9 35 98
28 0 13 5 6 7 9 6 33 96
29 0 12 4 6 7 9 4 28 92
30 0 12 4 6 8 9 2 22 92
31 0 13 4 6 7 9 4 27 84
32 0 13 4 6 8 9 0 18 82
33 0 12 4 6 8 10 0 35 80
34 0 13 4 6 8 10 0 10 72
35 0 13 5 6 8 10 0 1 56
36 0 12 3 5 6 8 41 34 100
37 0 13 4 5 7 8 38 21 84
38 0 12 4 5 7 8 31 24 90

Figure 4. Numbers of heteromorphisms (contradictions, ambiguities

and differences) in all 38 seven-tone subsets of the twelve-
semitone gamut.

38

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
privileged, or, to use a less contentious term, "special," by virtue of
containing no contradictions. These four collections are isolated in
Figure 5.
Within the group of four collections from 7-32 through 7-33 and
7-34 to 7-35, the smallest numbers of ambiguities and differences are
found in the diatonic collection (7-35). This is followed by the ascend-
ing melodic minor collection (7-34) and the harmonic minor and Ne-
apolitan ascending melodic minor collections (7-32 and 7-33,
respectively). I feel that there is a rankingof privilegedstatuses within
this group of four collections correspondingto the numbers of heter-
omorphismsor "glitches"in each. At the head of this hierarchystands
the diatonic collection, which is followed by the ascending melodic
minor collection, which is followed by both the harmonic minor col-
lection and the Neapolitan melodic minor collection.
I believe that one can interpret this hierarchyof privilege in terms
of degrees of complexity if one defines complexity as varyingdirectly
with the number of heteromorphismsor glitches of a given kind that
appearin various collections. According to such a formulationof com-
plexity, the diatonic collection, which, excepting the augmented-
fourth versus diminished-fifth ambiguity, is "glitch-free," would
qualify as the simplest of the 38. Next simplest would be the ascending
melodic minor collection, which has ambiguities involving not only
augmented fourths and diminished fifths but also between its single
diminished fourth (e.g., in C melodic minor) and its major
thirds (e.g., in C melodicB1-E-,
minor, E&-G, F-A, and G-B). More com-
plex than the ascending melodic minor collection would be the har-
monic minor collection, which features all of the above "glitches" as
well as ambiguitiesinvolving the augmented second (e.g., AK,-B in C
harmonic minor) and its various minor thirds (e.g., in C harmonic
minor, C-Ek, D-F, F-Al and B-D). Also quite complex is the Nea-
politan ascending melodic minor collection. Like the harmonicminor
collection, the Neapolitan ascending melodic minor collection has all
the "glitches" of both the diatonic and ascending melodic minor col-
lections. In addition, the Neapolitan ascending melodic minor con-
tains ambiguities involving its diminished third (e.g., in C
Neapolitan ascending melodic minor) on the one hand andB-D, its various
major seconds (e.g., E&-F,F-G, G-A, and A-B) on the other
hand. D,-E&,
SOME EMPIRICAL CORRELATES. In terms of this hierarchy
of complexity, several aspects of elementary and intermediate har-
mony curricula,modal music, and non-Westernforms make a certain
amount of sense. For instance, if one takes the diatonic collection C
D E F G A B and substitutes F# for F?, as in V/V or V7/V or a toni-
cization of the dominant in C major, the resulting collection is still

39

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
0?

number: informal name(s): illustrativenotes: cont

7-35 diatonic CD E F GAB 0

7-34 ascending melodic minor C D E6 F G A B 0
7-33 whole tone scale with filler C D6 E6 F G A B 0
tone or Neapolitan ascending
melodic minor
7-32 harmonic minor C D E6 F G A, B 0
harmonic major C D E F G A6 B

Figure 5. Four non-contradictoryseven-to

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
diatonic (see Example la). If one substitutes Bb for B1 in the same
C-major diatonic collection, as one might do if one were to use V7/IV
or effect a modulation to the subdominant, the collection that results
is also diatonic (see Example lb). If one raises the tonic in C major
from C to CQ (as in V/ii or a modulation to the supertonic), the re-
sulting collection is slightly more complex by virtue of being an as-
cending melodic minor collection (see Example ic). Correspondingly,
if one lowers the third degree of C major from E? to E, (as in a sud-
den modulation to the parallel or tonic minor), the collection that re-
sults is a little more heteromorphic than the original diatonic
collection, for it is an ascending melodic minor collection (see Exam-
ple id). If one raises the fifth degree in major (as in V/vi or I+), a
slightly more complex collection results, namely, harmonicminor (see
Example le). If one flattens the sixth degree in major (as in the use of
iv, iio, iij7 or viio7), a collection results that represents the inversion of
the harmonicminor collection: for example, relative to C major, one
would arrive at C D E F G A6 B, which is an inversion of C D Eb F
G A6 B. One could term this collection, in its particularinversional
form, "harmonicmajor" (see Example if). In this way, some of the
simplest, most elementary, and, one suspects, most frequent chromat-
icisms in tonal music do not entail any contradiction;instead, they in-
volve degrees of complexity within a non-contradictoryframework.
Further, the order of their complexity corresponds to the circle of
fifths, concerning which one might consult Regener's article "On
Allen Forte's Theory of Chords" (1974: 200-01).
One can also note that raising the third in minor (as in a tierce de
Picardie) need not entail contradiction. If the preceding span is me-
lodic minor (ascending), a diatonic collection results (see Example
ig). If the preceding passage is descending melodic minor (i.e., a dia-
tonic collection), a harmonic minor collection ensues (see Example
1h). And if the preceding span is harmonic minor, then an inverted
harmonicminor (or what one might term harmonicmajor) results (see
Example ii). Further, in major, the application and resolution of a
diminished seventh chord on any degree (as in the progression viio7/
ii-ii) always returns a harmonic minor collection, whether in its usual
or inverted form (i.e, as harmonic minor or as harmonic major-see
Example 1j). Interestinglyin this regard, augmented-sixthchords in-
volving the flattened sixth degree and raised fourth degree occupy a
special place in the curriculumof tonal harmony. Such augmented-
sixth chords constitute one of the first ventures into the realm of con-
tradictorycollections, and this fact would seem to correspondto their
special status in traditional music theory curricula.
Additionally, one can note that substituting ascending melodic
minor for harmonicminor in an individualpart (e.g., by changing A6

41

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 a) 7-35 b) 7-35 c)
7-35
A 7-35 7-35

rv v I v7V V Ir IV I V7/IV
vi I IV

7-34 d) 7-34 e)
7-35 7-35 7-32 7-32

V V42/ii ii IIV V i I IV V V7/viIV I iv

Example 1

to A? in C minor) removes a group of glitches and thereby constitutes

a shift to a simpler collection. Further, the status of the augmented
fourths and diminished fifths as dissonances in both tonal and modal
music can be considered a reflection of the glitch that they represent
in all seven-tone collections including, even, the diatonic collection. In
modal music, one can note that beyond the white-note collection and
the possibilityfor both and B , which existed in common medieval
B,
practice for several centuries, the first chromaticismsto be used reg-
ularly (e.g., in fourteenth-century polyphony) involved the added
notes FO,COand GO.Used singly or in combination, these chromatic
additions do not generally introduce contradictions. Instead, the vo-
cabularyof the diatonic collection appears to have been expanded in
normal practice during the late Middle Ages to comprise more com-
plex, but nonetheless non-contradictory,collections (e.g., of the as-
cending melodic minor type).
42

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 g) 7-35
h) 7-32 i) 7-32
7 -34 7-35 7-32

vii I iiv iIii vi

,

V I i V V42I i----- I i iv VI

1 i I I1 1

V I f IV V42 I i ----- i iv V I

7-32 7-2 [ 7-32

73 7-32
-27-32 F 7-32 7-32
7-32 F7-32
7-32

odJd

"I ,do .!
' ' g"
.

, ti

vii*7 I vii?17/ii - ii vii?7/iii-iii vii?7/lV-IV vii?7/V-V vii?7/vi-vi

Example 1 (Continued)

With regard to medieval and Renaissance music, one might quan-

tify intervals in a Pythagorean manner rather than in terms of an
equal-temperedformulation, as was done in the preceding discussion.
However, the main outlines of the preceding formulation would still
obtain. The principal exception would involve the pair consisting of
the augmented fourth and diminished fifth. In a Pythagoreanquanti-
fication, this pair would appear to be not merely ambiguous, but
downright contradictory. The contradiction between the augmented
fourth and diminished fifth would arise in a Pythagorean quantifica-
tion because the augmented fourth would correspond ideally to the
ratio 729/512 and the diminished fifth to only 1024/729;in cents, this
would amount to a fourth of fully 612 cents and fifth of only 588 cents.
Indeed, a Pythagoreanquantificationalways yields results that are as
complex as, or more complex than, an equal-tempered formulation;
and the same observation holds, indeed in spades, for formulationsin

43

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
terms of just intonation, various mean-tone temperaments, and so
forth. In short, quite apart from any practical questions concerning
the realizabilityand stability of various historicaltunings and temper-
aments under real performanceconditions and questions of audibility,
an equal-tempered quantification (or, better, quantization) always
yields the simplest, most elegant view of a piece as compared with
other, commensurable sorts of formulation. (For a related method-
ological injunctionto maximize simplicityin an interpretation,see Jay
Rahn 1983).
"GAPPED" COLLECTIONS. By adoptingmuch the same sort of
approach as was outlined above, one can also often reasonably infer
which notes are missing in so-called "gapped" collections (i.e., col-
lections containing six or fewer pitch classes). The principle involved
in this instance is that, all other factors being equal, one would con-
sider those notes to be implied that yield the simpler resultant
collection--allowing, of course, for ties, as in the case of two winning
collections (cf. Jay Rahn 1983:222-23). For example, all other factors
being equal, D would be considered a better candidate for the status
of missing note (or implied note) in the collection C E F G A B than
would be D6 or D#. If D were considered implied, the resulting col-
lection would be diatonic, whereas and DO would lead to collec-
D, (see Figure 6a). As a second
tions with contradictionsand ambiguities
example, one can observe that both B and Bbwould tie as candidates
for the status of missing or implied note in the case of C D E F G A.
In this instance, either note would result in a diatonic collection (as in
Figure 6b).
If one is to posit missing or implied notes in the case of tones con-
taining fewer than seven pitch classes, it would seem that there ought
to be some motivation for doing so. Here, one can adopt as a general
principle the notion that it is desirable to posit missing or implied
notes if the interpretation of the observed tones that results is en-
hanced thereby. One can operationalize the notion of enhancement
invoked here by stating that if as many or fewer heteromorphismsre-
sult from a given interpretation,then the interpretationis simpler, and
hence better. If one examines all of the subsets of the diatonic col-
lection, one finds that, with two important exceptions, as many or
fewer heteromorphismsresult if one posits missing or implied notes,
in comparisonwith the situations where missing or implied notes are
not posited. For example, if one regards the collection C D E F G A
as constituting, in literal-mindedfashion, six scale degrees, one finds
that the so-called scale degree between A and C involves an ambiguity
(see Figure 7). Whereas, under such an interpretation, A-C is made
up of one scale degree and three semitones, there are two intervals
that are made up of two scale degrees and three semitones (e.g., D-F

44

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
"gapped" "filled" resulting contradictions (c)
collection: collection: and ambiguities (a):
a) C- EFGAB CDEFGAB none
C D6 E F GAB vs. F-G, G-A and
B-D, (a)
A-B
vs. D6-E (c)
B-D, vs. E-G and A-C (a)
D6,-E vs. Db-F, F-A and
A-D,
G-B (a)
Db-G vs. (a)
etc. G-D,
C D# E F GAB D#-F vs. F-G, G-A and
A-B (a)
D#-F vs. C-DO(c)
C-D# vs. E-G and A-C (a)
D#-G vs. F-A, G-B and
B-D# (a)
A-D# vs. D#-A (a)
etc.
b)CDEFGA- CDEFGAB none
CDEFGAB none

Figure 6. Consequences of positing various "missing" notes in

"gapped" collections. "Gaps" indicated by dashes (-).

and E-G). By contrast, there are no glitches of this sort if the C D E

F G A collection is interpreted in terms of seven scale degrees (e.g.,
by positing either B or Bb as the missing note--which one is posited
is immaterial, all other factors being equal). In such an interpretation,
A-C is regarded as a minor third and is identical in this respect to D-F
and E-G, and does not give rise to any ambiguities of the sort that
emerge if one posits, in literal-mindedfashion, six scale degrees.
Apart from two importantexceptions, no matter what subset of the
diatonic collection one is concerned with, it is always true that if one
posits missing or implied notes along the lines of the closest-fittingdia-
tonic collection, one always arrivesat an interpretationthat is at least
as simple and elegant as what would result if one adopted a literal-
minded approach to analysis. This observation has profound conse-
quences for one's interpretation of so-called gapped scales, whether
these appear in early music (e.g., certain Gregorian melodies of very
narrowrange) or in non-Westernforms (e.g., many instances of pieces
found, for instance, in the Balkans and sub-SaharanAfrica and, in-

45

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
inter- scale semitones: ambiguous intervals: scale semi-
vals: degrees: with degrees: tones:
A-C 1 3 D-F, E-G 2 3
G-C, 2 5 C-F, D-G, 3 5
A-D E-A
F-C, 3 7 C-G, D-A 4 7
G-D,
A-E
F-D, 4 9 C-A 5 9
G-E

Figure 7. Ambiguities resulting from interpretationof C D E F G A

in terms of six (rather than seven) scale degrees.

deed, even in Euro-American children's songs). The best procedure,

all other factors being equal, is, with two exceptions, always to pre-
sume that the so-called missing notes are implied; in other words, to
presume that the so-called gaps are fillable in principle.
The two exceptions to this otherwise very general rule involve so-
called dominant discords, namely, the dominant seventh (e.g., G B D
F) and its inversion, the so-called half-diminishedseventh (e.g., B D
F A-see Figure 8). If these sets are interpretedin terms of four scale
degrees, the ambiguitysurroundingthe augmented fourth and dimin-
ished fifth in a diatonic interpretationdisappears. For instance, both
B-F and F-B in the sets G B D F and B D F A are understood, ac-
cording to a four-scale-degree interpretation, as consisting of two
scale degrees. This is in contrast with the situation in a diatonic in-
terpretation, where B-F and F-B, both of which consist of six semi-
tones, would correspondto four and three scale degrees, respectively.
I feel that this observation is of some importance for understanding
how the dominant seventh and half-diminished seventh have func-
tioned in music.
How unobserved tones might be implied is a problem in the foun-
dations of music theory. However, I do not feel that it is an insoluble
problem. For example, one can quite easily specify an implicationdef-
inition of the following sort. If tone x and tone y are observed, and
tone x and tone y form an interval (i.e., in this instance, a pitch in-
terval), and tone x and tone y form the interval k, and tone x is lower
than tone y, then there is a tone z, such that tone z is not necessarily
observed, and tone z forms the interval k with tone y, and tone z is
higher than tone y, and tone z is higher than tone x, and tone z is
implied by tone x and tone y, and there is another tone w, such that
46

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 interpretation: intervals: scale degrees: semitones:
a) seven-tone F-G 1 2
B-D, D-F 2 3
G-B 2 4
D-G 3 5
F-B 3 6
B-F 4 6
G-D 4 7
B-G 5 8
D-B, F-D 5 9
G-F 6 10
b) four-tone F-G 1 2
B-D, D-F 1 3
G-B 1 4
D-G 2 5
F-B, B-F 2 6
G-D 2 7
B-G 3 8
D-B, F-D 3 9
G-F 3 10

Figure 8. Interpretationsof dominant seventh collection accordingto

a) seven-tone formulation, and b) four-tone formulation.
Ambiguity in seven-tone formulation highlighted. Similar
observations hold for half-diminishedcollection (e.g., B D
F A), which is inversion of dominant seventh.

tone w is not necessarily observed, and tone w forms the interval k

with tone x, and tone w is lower than tone x, and tone w is lower than
tone y, and tone w is implied by tone x and tone y, and so forth (see
Figure 9). Further, if there is a tone u, such that tone u is observed or
tone u is implied by an observed tone, and if there is a tone v, such
that tone v is observed or tone v is implied by an observed tone, etc.
In this way, one can "generate," as it were, all the possibly implied
tones one might ever need to invoke, but one's generation will always
be based on tones that are in fact observed. Further, if one only admits
into one's system tones that are audible (e.g., by placing upper and
lower limits on their correspondingfrequencies), then one can prevent
one's formulation from deteriorating into a position whereby an infi-
nite number of tones would be considered to be implied. Moreover,
within an analysis, one can adopt the principle that only relations be-
tween observed entities such as tones may be asserted. Whereas im-
plied tones might mediate relations between observed tones, a
47

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
formulation that admits controlled implication need not commit one
to positing a sort of fairy-landinterpretation consisting in large mea-
sure of relations between implied entities or between implied and ob-
served entities. In other words, positing implied entities need not
prevent analysis from being rather narrowlyempirical.
Before leaving gapped collections, it is worthwhileto point out that
what holds for the diatonic collection does not necessarily hold for
other seven-tone collections, even other non-contradictory collec-
tions. For example, if one leaves out pitch class 1 from the Neapolitan
ascending melodic minor collection represented by 0 1 2 4 6 8 10, one
arrives at the so-called whole-note scale consisting of 0 2 4 6 8 10
(Forte's 6-35-see Figure 10). In such a situation, one arrives at sim-
pler interpretationsif one regards the 0 2 4 6 8 10 collection in terms
of six scale degrees ratherthan seven. Nevertheless, insofar as the dia-
tonic collection almost universally provides a preferable framework
for interpretingits subsets, one is encouragedto remain attentive to its
particularinterpretativepower and the power of seven-tone scalarfor-
mulations in general.
CHROMATICISM.In the opposite direction from what has just
been considered for so-called gapped collections, one can entertain
the possibility of chromaticismwith regard to collections like the dia-
tonic set. For example, one can compare what happens when the col-
lection 0 1 2 3 5 7 8 10 (Forte's 8-23) is interpreted in terms of eight

(w) x y (z)

Figure 9. Graphic representation of implication definition.

collection: ambiguities:
a) C D E F# G# A# B A#-C vs. C-D, D-E, E-F#, F#-G#,
GO-A#
G#-C and A#-D vs. C-E, D-F#,
E-G#, F#-A#
F)-C, G#-D and A#-E vs. C-F),
D-G# and E-A#
etc.
b) CDE F# G# A# none
Figure 10. Consequences of interpretingC D E F# G# A# collection in
terms of a) seven scale degrees (from seven-tone collection
C D E F# GOA# B[ = 7-32]) and b) six scale degrees (from
six-tone collection C D E F# G# A# [=6-35]).

48

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
scale degrees and in terms of seven scale degrees (see Figure 11). With
eight scale degrees, there are relatively many heteromorphisms.With
seven scale degrees, the only appreciableheteromorphismsthat arise,
beyond the obvious instances of tritones, involve differences that
occur within intervals of zero scale degrees. Whereas most of these
intervals are identical, consisting of zero semitones and zero scale de-
grees, there is a kind of interval, for example between F and Ft, where
there are zero scale degrees but there is also a full semitone. More-
over, this F-F# sort of interval yields ambiguitieswith the normal sort
of diatonic, as opposed to chromatic, semitones as represented, for
instance, by E-F, F#-G and B-C. Nevertheless, the glitches introduced
around the chromatic semitone interval give rise to nothing like the
sort of mayhem that emerges in an eight-scale-degree interpretation.
In general, if eight-tone collections consisting of the diatonic collec-
tion and what might be termed an extra note are analyzed in terms of
seven rather than eight scale degrees, then simpler, more elegant in-
terpretations arise in every case save the symmetrical8-26 collection
(see Figure 11).
WHY SEVEN? This observation leads one to consider why, or at
least in what way, the diatonic collection in particularand seven-tone
collections in general might be considered privileged. In other words,
why seven? Certainly, many of the data gathered in various cultures
by ethnomusicologists over the past century lead one to surmise that
there might be something special about seven-pc sets (cf. the partial
list in Rahn 1977, to which could be added several Turkishand Persian
scales). But specifying what is special about seven-pc sets is somewhat
hard to do in theoretical terms. Further, I feel that an adequate ac-
count of the diatonic collection would have to entail a specificationof
what one might mean by the otherwise rather vague term "scale."
It would seem that the term "scale" would minimally apply to sets
of pitch classes or their concrete instantiations. Such a set of pitch
classes would have to be considered to be ordered unambiguouslyin
such a way that, within any octave or register, a higher numeratedlet-
ter name (e.g., B3 vs. C3 or D3 vs. F3) would correspond to a higher
pitch and a higher scale degree. In this way, one would exclude such
possibilities as BOand C6 belonging to the same scale (cf., however,
Regener's formulationin 1974: 200). A BOtand a C6 might be asserted
to exist within a single piece, but they would be considered to belong
to different scales (e.g., C# major and G6 major, respectively). Fur-
ther in this vein, one would also exclude the possibility that, for ex-
ample, D# and Eb would be regarded as members of the same scale.
A D# and an El might be viewed as belonging to E major and B,
major, respectively, but not to a single scale, though they might ap-
pear in a single piece. Further, one can exclude the possibilitythat two

49

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
collection: numberof contra- ambi- diffe-
scale degrees dictions: guities: rences:
in interpreta-
tion:
0 1 2 3 5 7 8 10=8-23 eight 0 52 126
(e.g., CD E FF# GAB
or C D E F G A B B) seven 0 10 120
0 1 2 3 5 6 8 10=8-2 eight 10 59 137
(e.g., C C# DEFGAB
or C D EbE F G A B) seven 0 18 132
0 1 2 4 5 7 9 10=8-26 eight 0 32 110
(e.g. CDE F G G# AB
or CDE F G A A B) seven 0 28 142

Figure 11. Interpretationsof various eight-tone collections in terms of

eight and seven scale degrees. Winning interpretation
highlighted in each case.

versions of the same scale degree would be considered to belong to a

single scale. For example, in a normal seven-tone interpretation, one
would not accord F? and F# the status of being separate scale degrees.
Instead, one would view one of the notes as diatonic in a broad sense
and the other as chromatic (as in the above illustrationof eight-note
collections). This does not mean that one would have to insist in each
case that one rather than the other was the so-called "main" or dia-
tonic note and the other an "altered" or chromatic form. All one
needs to do is to insist that, in principle, one or the other, rather than
both, can be the principal note. Within this broad set of restrictions,
I would then recognize various degrees of privileged scalar status.
Particularlyprivileged would be collections in which every pc could
be considered to be one scale degree away from two other members.
As an initial definition of the notion of being one scale degree away,
I would invoke a concept that was introduced in an article of mine
over ten years ago whereby any two tones could be considered to be
a scale degree apart if they were two approximate half octaves apart
(cf. Jay Rahn 1977). A major approximatehalf octave ranges from 1/2
to 2/3 of its corresponding whole, a minor approximate half octave
from 1/2to 1/3of its corresponding whole-cf. Jay Rahn 1983 for an
essentially non-numerical formulation. In a semitone-based system,
such an extent might correspond to anywhere from one to four semi-
tones. According to such a loose definition, all 38 seven-tone collec-
tions could be considered privileged except 7-1, 7-2, 7-4 and 7-5 (see
Figure 12).
50

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7-1 1111116[!] 7-20 1 12 3 1 13
7-2 1111125[!] 7-21 1121313
7-3 1111134 7-22 1 1 3 12 13
7-4 1111215[!] 7-23 2111223
7-5 1112115[!] 7-24 1112223
7-6 1111314 7-25 2 1 12 1 2 3
7-7 1113114 7-26 12 1 12 2 3
7-8 2111124 7-27 1 12 12 2 3
7-9 1111224 7-28 12 2 1 1 2 3
7-10 1111233 7-29 1 122123
7-11 1211124 7-30 1122213
7-12 1111323 7-31 1212123
7-13 1121124 7-32 1212213
7-14 1112214 7-33 1122222
7-15 1122114 7-34 1212222
7-16 1112133 7-35 12 2 12 2 2
7-17 1121133 7-36 1 1 12 1 2 4
7-18 1112313 7-37 12 1 12 1 4
7-19 1113 123 7-38 1 12 12 1 4

Figure 12. Intervals between adjacent members of 38 seven-tone col-

lections (cf. Figure 1, above). Collections where adjacent
pitches are not between one and four semitones apart are
highlighted.

One can recognize as even more privileged any collection that man-
ifests a sort of cycling in approximatehalf octaves that was suggested
in my 1977 article. According to this formulation,every tone would be
a member of a set or bunch of tones comprisingtwo approximatehalf
octaves (e.g., C-G-D). Further, every tone in the bunch would belong
to three such triples, and all the tones in such triples would belong to
a triple of triples that comes "full circle" (e.g., for C D E F G A B,
a tone corresponding to D might belong to C-G-D, G-D-A and
D-A-E; E might belong to D-A-E, A-E-B and E-B-F; and F might
belong to E-B-F, B-F-C and F-C-G, where F-triples link up with
D-triples by way of C and G). Only eleven of the thirty-eightcollec-
tions appear to be privileged in this way (see Figure 13, and on the
empirical predominance of these eleven in South Indian music, de-
spite the "artificial"formulation of the mela system, see Jay Rahn
1981).
Within this overall picture, one could also recognize the partial or-
dering of privilege with regard to contradiction, ambiguityand differ-
ence that was described at the outset of this paper (see Figure 4); and
one could cite as a very special set of cases the four non-contradictory
collections dealt with earlier, and in particularthe diatonic collection.

51

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
collection: cycle in pc's: cycle in ordered ic's:
7-15 0 4 8 2 7 1 6 (0) 4 4 6 5 6 5 6
7-20 0 4 9 2 8 1 7 (0) 4 5 5 6 5 6 5
7-22 0 5 9 2 8 1 6 (0) 5 4 5 6 5 5 6
7-28 0 5 9 3 7 1 6 (0) 5 4 6 4 5 5 6
7-29 0 4 9 2 7 1 6 (0) 4 5 5 5 6 5 6
7-30 0 4 9 2 8 1 6 (0) 4 5 5 6 5 5 6
7-31 0 4 9 3 7 1 6 (0) 4 5 6 4 6 5 6
7-32 0 4 9 3 8 1 6 (0) 4 5 6 5 5 5 6
7-33 0 4 10 2 8 1 6 (0) 4 6 4 6 5 5 6
7-34 0 4 10 3 8 1 6 (0) 4 6 5 5 5 5 6
7-35 0 5 10 3 8 1 6 (0) 5 5 5 5 5 5 6

Figure 13. Intervals between members of eleven seven-tone collec-

tions that form a cycle of approximate half octaves (each
interval consisting of three scale degrees and four to six
semitones).
Some collections having numbers of tones other than seven are re-
markably non-contradictory, unambiguous and little differentiated.
Among even-numberedcollections one can cite what might be termed
the diminished-seventhcollection (0 3 6 9--Forte's 4-28), the so-called
whole-tone scale (0 2 4 6 8 10-Forte's 6-35), and the octatonic scale
(0 1 3 4 6 7 9 10-Forte's 8-28). Among five-tone collections, the so-
called anhemitonic pentatonic, which might better be named the atri-
tonic pentatonic, stands out as non-contradictory,unambiguous, and
minimallydifferentiated. And to this list, one can add equipentatonic
or slindro.
As well, one can acknowledge that the augmented-triadcollection
4
(0 8-Forte's 3-12) is entirely non-contradictory,unambiguous, and
undifferentiated if interpreted in terms of three scale degrees rather
than in terms of, for example, a harmonicminor (or harmonicmajor)
collection. Additionally, as was indicated earlier, dominant sevenths
and half-diminishedseventh chords in isolation are better regarded as
four-tone scales. Further, one can note that not only a) major, minor
and diminished triads, but also b) minor seventh and major seventh
chords are, in isolation, just as well interpreted in terms of three or
four scale degrees, respectively, as they are in terms of seven scale
degrees. This fact suggests that such sonorities are privileged as dis-
tinct entities, apart from any larger context in which they might ap-
pear. Nevertheless, many scales found around the world have seven
tones. In addition to the major and minor scales already mentioned,
one can cite pilog of Indonesia; equiheptatonic, which is distributed
across several continents and seas; and the many seven-tone collec-
tions that form the basis for Arabic, Turkish, Persian, and South

52

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Asian tonal systems. Unlike any of the even-numberedcollections al-
luded to earlier, most (if not virtually all) of these seven-tone collec-
tions manifest the sort of cycling in approximatehalf octaves that was
just discussed, as do pentatonic and sldndro.
One can tighten the music-theoreticalnet on five- and seven-tone
scales a little further by acknowledgingthat a certain type of propor-
tionate relationship between scale degrees and unit intervals (e.g.,
semitones) can only obtain in pc sets consisting of certain numbersof
notes. One can illustrate this proportionate relationship in terms of
the diatonic collection. In a seven scale-degree set, all ordered degree-
class intervals other than the octave and unison, which comprise zero
scale degrees, can be partitioned into unordered degree-class inter-
vals. For example, in a seven-note scale, there is an unordereddegree-
class interval corresponding to one or six (or eight or thirteen etc.)
scale degrees, as represented by the pitch-classpairs C-D and D-C in
the C major collection (see Figure 14). There is also an unordered
degree-class interval consisting of two or five (or nine or twelve etc.)
scale degrees, as represented by C-E and E-C in the C major collec-
tion. And finally, there is an unordered degree-class interval consist-
ing of three or four (or ten or eleven etc.) scale degrees, as
represented by C-F and F-C in the C major collection.
A remarkable feature of scale systems having certain numbers of
notes is that one can order their degree-class intervalsin terms of pre-
cise halves. An ordered degree-class interval consisting of four de-
grees (e.g., C4-G4) is precisely bisected within a mod-7 system by
ordered degree-class intervals consisting of two scale degrees (e.g.,
C4-E4 and E4-G4 bisect C4-G4-see Figure 14). A correspondingor-
dered degree-class intervalconsisting of three degrees (specifically,an
ordered degree interval of ten degrees, e.g., G4-C6) is precisely bi-
sected by ordered degree intervals of five degrees, which belong to
unordered degree-class interval 2 (e.g., G4-E5 and E5-C6 bisect G4-
C6). Every ordered degree-class interval belonging to unordered
degree-class interval 2 is precisely bisected within a mod-7 system by
intervals belonging to unordered degree-class interval 1 (e.g., C4-D4
and D4-E4 bisect C4-E4, and E4-D5 and D5-C6 bisect E4-C6, and so
forth). And every ordered degree-class interval belonging to unor-
dered degree-class interval 1, which in a mod-7 system can include or-
dered degree intervals of eight or six degrees, is precisely bisected by
intervals belonging to unordered degree-class interval 3 (e.g., C4-G4
and G4-D5 bisect C4-D5, and C4-F4 and F4-B4 bisect C4-B4). In this
way, the principle of proportionateness embodied in the notion of
halves can permeate a seven-note scale. Indeed, one can assert that
the relation of half to whole partitions the unordered interval classes
in a mod-7 system. Moreover, the principle of proportionatenesscan

53

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 1)
0-class: 0 7 14
1-class: 1 6 8 13 15
2-class: 2 5 9 12 16
3-class 3 4 10 11 17 18 etc.
1-class + 2-class = 1/2: 1 vs. 2; 6 vs. 12; 8 vs. 16; etc.
2-class + 3-class = 1/2: 2 vs. 4; 5 vs. 10; 9 vs. 18; etc.
3-class + 1-class = 1/2: 3 vs. 6; 4 vs. 8; 10 vs. 20; etc.
2)
Conditions and restrictions:if modularinterval = p, and k is a nat-
ural number, then cycling in precise halves holds when
a) p is prime;
b) the minimum k for which p divides 22k- 1 is
k = (p-l1)/2
Subsidiaryfacts:
d) p always divides 2p-1-1 (according to Fermat's
Theorem-not Fermat's Last Theorem-see
Hardy and Wright, 1954, p. 63)
e) for any minimum value of k, k always divides (p-
1)/2
3)
First moduli for which precise cycling of degree classes in halves
holds:
(3) 5 7 11 13 19 23 29 37 47 53

Figure 14. 1) Cycle of degree-class intervals in precise halves for

mod-7 system; 2) conditions and restrictions on modular
intervals for which degree-class intervals will cycle in pre-
cise halves and subsidiary facts (supplied by George
O'Brien, Mathematics Dept., York University, 1988); 3)
first modular intervals for which cycling of degree-class in-
tervals in precise halves holds.

only permeate scalar structures consisting of certain odd, and more

specifically certain prime, numbers of notes (e.g., five, seven or
eleven, but not, for instance, nine notes). Further, in the case of cer-
tain scales, e.g., diatonic and pentatonic, there is a perfect correspon-
dence between precise bisection in terms of scale degrees, to which I
have just been referring, and approximatebisection in terms of semi-
tones (i.e., in terms of unit intervals-see Figure 15; cf. Jay Rahn
1978).
54

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
pitches referred to:
C4 D4 E4 F4 G4 A4 B4 C5 D5 E5 F5 G5 A5 B5 C6 D6 E6 F6 G6
D4 bisects C4-E4 into 1 + 1 scale degrees and 2 + 2 semitones
E4 D4-F4 .... 2+1
F4 E4-G4 1+ 2
G4 F4-A4 2+ 2
A4 G4-B4 2+ 2
B4 A4-C5 2+ 1
C4 B4-D5 1+ 1
E4 bisects C4-G4 into 2 + 2 scale degrees and 4 + 3 semitones
F4 D4-A4 3+ 4
G4 E4-B4 3+ 4
A4 F4-C5 4+ 3
B4 G4-D5 4+ 3
C5 A4-E5 3+ 4
D5 B4-F4 3+ 3
G4 bisects C4-D5 into 4 + 4 scale degrees and 7 + 7 semitones
A4 D4-E5 7+ 7
B4 E4-F5 7+ 6
C5 F4-G5 7+ 7
D5 " G4-A5 7+ 7
E5 A4-B5 7+ 7
F5 B4-C6 6+ 7
F4 bisects C4-B4 into 3 + 3 scale degrees and 5 + 6 semitones
G4 D4-C5 5+ 5
A4 E4-D5 5+ 5
B4 F4-E5 6+ 5
C4 G4-F5 5+ 5
D4 A4-G5 5+ 5
E4 B4-A5 5+ 5
A4 bisects C4-F5 into 5 + 5 scale degrees and 9 + 8 semitones
B4 D4-G5 9+ 8
C5 E4-A5 8+ 9
D5 F4-B5 9+ 9
E5 G4-C6 9+ 8
F5 A4-D6 8+ 9
G5 B4-E6 8+ 9
B4 bisects C4-A5 into 6 + 6 scale degrees and 11 + 10 semitones
C5 D4-B5 10+11
D5 E4-C6 10+10
E5 F4-D6 11+10
F5 A4-F6 10+ 10
a5 B4-G6 10+10
Figure 15. Universal bisection in diatonic collection.

55

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 For example, within the C-major collection, D4-E4 and E4-F4 bi-
sect D4-F4 precisely in terms of scale degrees and approximately in
terms of semitones. Moreover, D4-F4 and F4-A4 bisect D4-A4 pre-
cisely in terms of scale degrees and approximatelyin terms of semi-
tones. And D4-A4 and A4-E5 bisect D4-E5 in both ways, as before.
And so forth for all intervals in the collection. Such a situation does
not hold, however, for all seven-tone collections, even for all non-
contradictoryseven-tone collections. For example, in the C harmonic
minor collection, and bisect G4-B4 precisely into
G4-A1,4
halves in terms of scale A1,4-B4
degrees, but G4-Ab4 and Ab4-B4 do not bisect
G4-B4 even approximatelyinto halves in terms of semitones (because
G4-Ab4 forms, in informal terms, less than "one-third" of G4-B4).
Nevertheless, among the thirty-eightseven-tone collections, universal
proportionate bisection holds for three of the collections, and these
three collections comprise the diatonic, the ascending melodic minor
and the Neapolitan melodic minor collections. One might also note
that Myhill's Property can be regarded as a special, boundary case of
universal proportionate bisection (cf. Clough and Myerson 1985:
250).1
In sum, it would seem that much of what one finds empiricallywith
regard to seven-tone collections in general and the diatonic collection
in particularcan be capturedby consideringthe ways in which interval
sizes can be coordinated when expressed in terms of scale degrees and
semitones. It would seem that investigatingvarious manners in which
double quantifications(or, better, double quantizations) are coordi-
nated might prove fruitful in the future. One would hope thereby to
acquire a richer view of what it means for a piece to be considered a
manifestationof a scale. And ultimately, one might hope to create cal-
culi whereby one could locate, a little more determinately than hith-
erto, what might be the boundariesbetween atonality and tonality, or,
as I would prefer to characterizethe workingdistinction, between sca-
lar music and ascalar music.
TRANSFORMATION. With regard to the so-called chromatic
heptachord(Forte's 7-1 or 0 1 2 3 4 5 6), one can note that, in an atonal
formulation, it can be considered to bear a strong connection with the
diatonic collection insofar as both are deep scales, indeed, the only
deep scales among the thirty-eight seven-tone collections, and each
can be transformedinto the other by means of a simple multiplication
function, whereby 7-1 multiplied by 5 yields 7-35 and vice versa (cf.
John Rahn 1980: 53-55 and Howe 1965). However, in an interpreta-
tion that admits scale degrees, these two collections are virtuallypolar
opposites. 7-35 contains no contradictions, whereas 7-1 embodies the
greatest number of contradictionsthat appears among the thirty-eight
seven-tone collections. This observation, then, suggests a composi-

56

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
tional and analytic strategy for moving fairly freely back and forth be-
tween relatively scalar and relatively ascalar realms.
With respect to transformation,one can observe that by mapping
any seven-tone collection into any other seven-tone collection in a
manner that is one-to-one and onto, one can proceed from one pat-
tern of complexity to another. Further, a special case arises if the two
collections involved in such a mapping are determinately related to
each other in terms of complexity. One collection can be regarded as
determinately related to another in terms of scale-degree-semitone
complexity if it is clearly more complex than another by virtue of con-
taining at least as many contradictions, at least as many ambiguities,
and at least as many differences as the other. Such a situation holds in
the case of the diatonic collection on the one hand and all of the re-
maining thirty-sevenseven-tone collections save the chromatichepta-
chord on the other hand (see Figure 4). In such a situation, one can
regard the transformationor mapping of one collection into or onto
another as having a direction in much the same sense as one can dis-
tinguish between upper and lower levels and between relatively back-
ground and foreground levels in linguistic, semiological, and
Schenkerian analyses.
Finally, one can offer psychologicalinterpretationsof the empirical
patterns that one observes in the distributionwithin and between cul-
tures of what might be termed "naturallyoccurring"seven-tone col-
lections. By and large, simpler structurestend to predominate; and in
the tradition of cognitive science, one might offer the conjecture that
whereas heteromorphisms or glitches might take up relatively more
neural space, the relatively isomorphic, glitch-free, and simple struc-
tures which one tends to encounter are relatively easy to process. (All
that one need posit here is a means for recognizing glitches and a
counter). According to an alternative, but related, behavioristformu-
lation, one could regard isomorphisms and simplicity as generalized
reinforcers, which, other historicalfactors being equal, would tend to
increase the probabilitythat the human activitythat broughtthem into
being would be repeated in the future (cf. Jay Rahn 1987: 122-25).
And in the domain of such activity, one might include motor, percep-
tual, imaginative, and symbolic acts.
CONCLUSION. By way of conclusion, one can note that, al-
though the above formulation is couched in terms of numbers, the
idea at its root does not depend on particularnumbers. By contrast
with formulations involving cardinality, multiplicity, and variety, the
findings presented above do not hinge on particularnumbers, e.g., a
specific number of ambiguities. In each case, the distinction is be-
tween more and fewer heteromorphismsor isomorphismsrather than
between particularnumbers thereof. For example, if one compares C

57

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
D E F G A B with C D El F G A B (e.g., by way of mapping C onto
C, D onto D, E onto El, etc.), the salient result is that there are more
heteromorphisms in the ascending melodic minor collection than in
the diatonic collection, rather than that there are specific numbers of
heteromorphismsin the respective collections or that there is a specific
difference between the numbers of heteromorphismsin the two.
One can generalize the results presented above by taking sets of
pitches (as opposed to pitch classes) that span a thirteenth (e.g., C4
D4 E4 F4 G4 A4 B4 C5 D5 E5 F5 G5 A5) as a startingpoint for one's
comparisons. If one examines a single such set, one finds every pos-
sible ordered interval class (whether expressed in terms of pitch
classes or degree classes) represented by at least one concrete, par-
ticularordered interval (i.e., pair of pitches). If one compares this set
with its counterpartin another collection (e.g., C4 D4 E&4F4 G4 A4
B4 C5 D5 E&5F5 G5 A5), one finds that, for example, a diatonic set
contains, note-for-note, fewer heteromorphisms than an ascending
melodic minor set. If one duplicates any of the concrete, particular
pitches associable with a given collection at the unison or in any reg-
ister, and if one duplicates the correspondingentries for the other col-
lection (the correspondence in question being embodied in the
mapping one has chosen), then the same association of fewer and
more holds. For instance, there are more ambiguities and differences
between individual, concrete, particulartones that correspond to an
ascending melodic minor collection than there are between tones cor-
responding to a diatonic collection. If one "deletes" one or more of
the original thirteen pitches, the association of fewer and more be-
tween the two collections holds in the very general forms of "as few as
or fewer than" and "as many as or more than." And these general
forms of comparison hold, however many pitches one duplicates
and/or deletes.
In the manner just outlined, one can undertake general "thought
experiments" such that all relevant factors are held constant save the
salient differences between two collections. Further, by adopting such
a procedure, one can avoid the platonism involved in many set-
theoretical formulations (whereby, for example, specific numbers are
viewed as "properties"(e.g., cardinalities, multiplicitiesor varieties)
of particular"sets," or "classes," of "pitch classes"). And finally, one
can concretize the notion of complexity presented above and specify,
for example, that the consequence of choosing E rather than E&,in a
given situation, would be simpler, and hence more reinforcing, than
the opposite, all other factors being equal.

58

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 NOTES
The present article is a revised version of a paper read at the annual meeting of The
Society for Music Theory in Baltimore, November, 1988. I am indebted to John
Clough of SUNY Buffalo for his comments on an earlier rendering of this study.

1. Of the various moduli listed in Figure 14, 3, mod-3 is strange insofar as all in-
terval classes mod-3 are halves of themselves; that is, in a sense, every unor-
dered interval class is its own "offspring" or "parent," since 1 mod-3 is half of
2 mod-3, which is really both 1 mod-3 and half of 1 mod-3. One can also note
a world-wide tendency for five-tone scales to constitute subsets of seven-tone
scales such that they comprise the following pattern of seven-tone scale-degree
intervals: 1112 1 2 (e.g., C D E G A) or some cyclic equivalent (e.g., 1 2 1 1
2, as in C D F G A). This is true of the anhemitonic (or atritonic) pentatonic,
the Japanese in-scale, and five-tone versions of equiheptatonic (found in Thai-
land and the South Seas-cf. Zemp and Schwarz 1973) and pilog. In a 1112 1
2 arrangement, the number of glitches is minimized in comparison with the
most glitch-free alternative (having the pattern 1 1 1 2 2-even more "five-tone
vs. seven-tone" glitches are found in the only remaining possibility, 1 1 1 3).
By way of illustration, one can observe that in C D E G A there are a) 2
x 3 = 6 five-versus-seven differences (between E-G and A-C on the one hand
and C-D, D-E and G-A on the other hand) plus 4 x 1 = 4 such differences (be-
tween D-G, E-A, G-C and A-D, and C-E, respectively), etc., for a total of 20
differences; and b) (1 x 2) + (1 x 2) = 4 ambiguities (between C-E, and E-G
and A-C, respectively, and between E-C, and G-E and C-A, respectively). By
contrast, the pattern 1 1112 2 (as in C D E F A) gives rise to a) 2 x 3 = 6 plus
(1 x 2) + (1 x 2) + (2 x 2) = 8 total of 28 differences, and b)
(2 x 2) + (1 x 2) + (2 x 1) + (2 ...--a
x 1) + (2 x 2) = 14 ambiguities. Further,
while neither of these five-tone subsets of seven-tone collections contain con-
tradictions between the five- and seven-tone quantizations, the only other five-
seven pattern, namely, 1 1 1 1 3 (as in C D E F G), comprises
(1 x 3) + (2 x 2) + (2 x 1) = 9 contradictions, as well as 20 differences and
4 ambiguities-cf. the parallel situation for 7-1 and 7-35 with regard to twelve-
versus-seven quantizations. The simplicity of five-seven quantization in 1 1 2 1
2 sets would seem to underlie their use throughout the world as independent
entities, both alone and in conjunction with their relatively "chromatic," seven-
tone counterparts. Again, there appears to be a link with Myhill's Property (on
which, see again Clough and Myerson, loc. cit.).

LIST OF WORKS CITED

Babbitt, Milton. 1965. "The Structure and Function of Music Theory: I," College
Music Symposium 5: 49-60.
Browne, Richmond. 1981. "Tonal Implications of the Diatonic Set," In Theory
Only 5/6-7: 3-21.
Clough, John. 1979. "Aspects of Diatonic Sets," Journal of Music Theory 23: 45-
61.
. 1980. "Diatonic Interval Sets and Transformational Structures," Perspec-
tives of New Music 18/2: 461-82.

59

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Clough, John and Gerald Myerson. 1985. "Variety and Multiplicity in Diatonic Sys-
tems," Journal of Music Theory 29/2: 249-69.
Cogan, Robert and Pozzi Escot. 1976. Sonic Design. New York: Prentice-Hall.
Cohn, Richard. 1988. "Inversional Symmetry and Transpositional Combination in
Bart6k," Music Theory Spectrum 10: 19-42.
Forte, Allen. 1964. "A Theory of Set-Complexes for Music," Journal of Music The-
ory 8: 136-83.
_-. 1973. The Structure of Atonal Music. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Gamer, Carlton. 1967. "Some Combinational Resources of Equal-Tempered Sys-
tems," Journal of Music Theory 11/1: 32-59.
Gauldin, Robert. 1983. "The Cycle-7 Complex: Relations of Diatonic Set Theory
to the Evolution of Ancient Tonal Systems," Music Theory Spectrum 5: 39-55.
Hardy, G. H. and E. M. Wright. 1954. An Introduction to the Theory of Numbers,
3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Howe, Hubert S. 1965. "Some Combinational Properties of Pitch Structures," Per-
spectives of New Music 4/1: 45-61.
Rahn, Jay. 1977. "Some Recurrent Features of Scales," In Theory Only 2/11-12:
43-52.
_. 1978. "Constructs for Modality, ca. 1300-1550," Canadian Association of
University Schools of Music Journal 8/2: 5-39.
_. 1981. "Structure, Frequency and Artificiality in South Indian Melas," in T.
Temple Tuttle, ed., Proceedings of the Saint Thyagaraja Music Festivals, Cleve-
land, Ohio, 1978-81. Cleveland, Ohio: The Greater Cleveland Ethnographic
Museum, pp. 109-28.
- . 1983. A Theory for All Music: Problems and Solutions in the Analysis of
Non-Western Forms. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
- . 1985. "Restricted Relational Richness and Musical Analysis," Journal of
Comparative Literature and Aesthetics 8/1-2: 45-53.
_. 1987. "Music in Theory and Practice: A Behavioral View," Integral: The
Journal of Applied Musical Thought 1: 105-25.
Rahn, John. 1980. Basic Atonal Theory. New York: Longman.
Regener, Eric. 1974. "On Allen Forte's Theory of Chords," Perspectives of New
Music 13/1: 191-212.
Zemp, Hugo and J. Schwarz. 1973. "Echelles 6quiheptaphoniques des fluitesde pan
chez les 'Are 'Are (Malaita, Iles Salomon)," Yearbook of the International Folk
Music Council 5: 85-121.

60

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:33:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions