Jon Gallant:

>Accordingly, I offer this statistical definition of "classical" as opposed
>to "popular": music in which the probability (or frequency) of a measure
>not in common time is greater than 0.0000000001.
>
>Although some may find this simple definition overly reductive, it is easy
>enough to use that we could teach it to a computer, and thereby automate
>the process of making this distinction.

By this definition Carribean pop is high classical since most of its
meters are based in traditional polyrhtyhms from africa, and a pure 4/4
beat is almost impossible to find.  Almost all of classical era music is
written in 4/4, 3/4, 2/4 and 6/8 - essentially two time signatures binary
and triple.  Compared to even basic indian classical music, this is a
poverty of rhythms.  Most indian drummers are expected to be able to do
at least 13/14 and many of the masters are able to beat out higher ratios
than that.

One might as well classify architecture by the variety of foundations
that it uses, declaring those based on rectangles must be "popular" styles
versus others which are high styles.

I would be willing to bet if we took the totality of the traditional
accoustical corpus of classical music from the advent of current notational
practice to 1900, that the ratio of unusual meters would not be that much
different that what is on the radio currently.

stirling s newberry
[log in to unmask]
http://www.mp3.com/ssn