References in periodicals archive ?
Projecting the meter of a work is a key part of the work's identity and should guide all decisions about phrasing.
Another key to interpreting rhythm and phrasing is to understand the natural inflection of a rhythmic pattern.
Duration and dynamic shading are very useful to show direction and once these facets are internalized students will exhibit a heightened awareness to phrasing.
Scrutinizing the rhythm of a given work will also reveal other clues to guide phrasing decisions.
Another way to achieve the desired phrasing is to avoid accents on the "leading" notes.
The natural phrasing comes from the entire musical gesture, not the individual notes.
Accents can detract from the phrasing when they disrupt the melodic line (for example placing an accent on beat two or the second eighth note of beat three in Example 12) or when they are too strong.
It is through the various types of rhythmic phrasing and nuances discussed in this article.
The results of Experiment 1 were surprising, however, because the temporal phrasing cues were not only sufficiently salient that they should have been adequate discriminative cues, but the cues were also placed at chunk boundaries where they should have provided the most benefit to detecting and coding pattern structure.
To examine why temporal phrasing retarded learning in Experiment 1, Experiment 2 examined the effects of temporal versus nontemporal phrasing cues, in this case, visual phrasing cues.
Procedures were the same as those reported in Experiment 1 with the exception that all mice were trained with the violation pattern only, but with four phrasing conditions.
Digits indicate the clockwise position of the correct response for a given trial, dashes between three-element chunks indicate 3-s pauses, and asterisks indicate where light levels changed for the visual phrasing cue.
The results indicate that retardation of learning because of phrasing cues in mice is not restricted to situations where the passage of time is a factor.
Significant interactions included visual phrasing x blocks, F(9, 108) = 3.
The results show that both temporal phrasing groups were the most retarded in learning relative to no phrasing, and visual phrasing alone produced an intermediate level of retardation of learning.