Bernard Chasan wrote:

>Where do these statistics come from? They don't ring true if for example,
>you include Broadway show music as popular.

Actually I don't count Broadway show music as popular but as classical.
It is the modern form of the opera.  And as classical music, it seldom
contains a continous drum beat.  Though the songs are often simple ABA
forms (but not always), the overtures, for example the overture to "My
Fair Lady" is clearly classical in style.

As for the stats, surely you would agree that 99% of the music written
from the 1600 to 1900 does not contain a continous drum beat even though
drums have been available since the days of jungle native tribes.  Now
why was the continous drum beats avoided by nearly every composer, even
the creative rebels? (apart form the few exceptions already mentioned)

Likewise, nearly all jazz, rock, modern country, even blues, Sinatra's
arrangements, etc do contain a continuous drum beat, going back to the
20's..

I would even be willing to use 95% or even 90% and challenge anyone
to name any other criteria, other than time of writing and electronic
instrumentation, that so clearly partitions music into these two classes.
My comments on this were in response to Chris Bonds suggestion that the
Library of Congress' categories of vocal/instrumental was the fundamental
partition.  So I wondered if continuous drums vs.  no continuous drums
partitioned music into classical/popular better than vocal vs.
instrumental.

Tired of dealing with "exception oriented logic", and preferring to deal
with phenomenon at a more general level where meaningful discoveries can
be used to foster better understanding, I remain Sincerely,

Bill Pirkle