Categories and Timing: On the Perception of Meter

Abstract

In his paper Meter and Grouping in African Music, Temperley asks following questions: How well can African rhythm be reconciled with prevailing music-theoretical view of rhythm? What similarities and differ ences emerge between African rhythm and Western rhythm, as latter is viewed by contemporary music theory? (2000:65). My point of departure in this article is only slightly different. Like Temperley, I want to discuss implica tions of some recent theories of rhythm and meter in light of evidence from outside so-called Western (art) music. However, I will not primarily address African music. I will instead draw on experiences from other types of music, such as jazz and traditional Scandinavian dance music. My conclu sions will also differ from Temperley's. In introduction to his paper on meter and grouping inAfrica,Temperley states To anticipate my conclusions, I will argue that, at a fundamental level, African rhythm as described by eth nomusicologists is similar to Western rhythm and can be accommodated in same basic model (ibid.). I am not going to argue against this specific conclusion, but I will point to theories and empirical evidence that seem not to fit well with models of meter referred to by Temperley. More specifically, this paper addresses what I perceive as a fundamental conflict between aspects of what might be called the microrhythmic para digm, and models of meter that take for granted a low(est) metric level with isochronous pulses. I will argue that latter models are, at best, limited in scope, and of little value to describe and explain certain quite common observable rhythmic behaviors. The idea of a lowest isochronous metric level is more or less explicit in concepts such as additive rhythms and den sity referent, as well as in more modern models, like those of Justin London (1995, 2002, 2004). With reference to Kauffman (1980:396), I will refer to