VI

Accent as Measure Articulation and as
Measure Definition

THE DYNAMIC ACCENT became the predominant means of distinguishing between good and bad notes in the second half of the eighteenth century. The difficult concept of quantitas intrinseca and the perception of “superior regard” were more easily explained by describing the beat as having an accent. The measure became associated with a recurring pattern of dynamic stress.

The accent itself was carefully discussed and defined by some theorists, although others gave only simplified definitions. Conservative writers of the late eighteenth century mentioned a variety of articulations, including accent, but even the most thoughtful of them considered accent to be the principal means of defining the measure.

The change from predominantly quantitative to accentual articulation was gradual, of course, but early in the nineteenth century, John Wall Callcott wrote:

The Bars of Music are not only useful for dividing the Movement into equal Measures, but also for shewing the notes upon which the Accent is to be laid.

The Measures of Common Time are divided into four parts; of these, the first and third are accented; the second and fourth unaccented. In the course of this work the accented will be termed strong parts and the unaccented weak parts of the measure. ¹

Callcott is well informed about eighteenth-century concepts of meter, but he discusses even the quantitative feet of rhythmopoeia as accentual groupings: “In the performance of these Rhythms (from poetic feet), the Accent is always shewn by the pressure laid upon the Note which immediately follows the Bar.” The measure indicated by the tactus beat was described as follows:

These inferior Accents which belong to the Times of the Measure, do not, by any means, destroy that great and predominant Accent that belongs to the first Note which follows the Bar, and which is accompanied by the Thesis (The Niederschlag of the Germans) or depression of the hand in beating Time. The Arsis (The Aufschlag of the Germans) or elevation of the hand, always follows on the weak part of the measure. ²

Callcott’s reliance on accent to define meter reflects a change in musical style; dynamic stress, it seems, had become usual in performance. Metrical accent was augmented by an additional articulation, called “emphasis,” which occurs “on the weak parts of the Measure, by the different groupings of the Quavers, Semiquavers, etc.; and by the emphatic marks of Rf etc. placed over the notes.”³ Accent is distinguished from emphasis:

In performing on the Piano Forte, a great difference seems to exist between them (accent and emphasis); since Accent always requires pressure immediately after the Note is struck, and Emphasis requires force at the very time of striking the Note. Thus Accent may be used in the most Piano passages, but Emphasis always supposes a certain degree of Forte.⁴

Although it may be argued that there is little effect from pressing the piano key after the note is struck, the performer feels a difference that may be conveyed to an audience. Although such pressure cannot affect the sound produced, because of the mechanism of the piano key, it may result in heightening the note by adding to its length. Callcott’s description suggests that “accent” refers to sustaining the note, while “emphasis” requires stressing the attack of the note.

The word “accent” had been used in defining meter in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century treatises, more often in English sources than Continental. Butler used it to describe different kinds of measures (1636), and Alexander Malcolm used it to distinguish metrical groups (1721). The anonymous author of A Philosophical Essay (1677) says, “there is a loudness and briskness given to every other pulse, which makes it eminent,” and also that “length and loudness is given to the Key notes.”⁵ This is an amplification of the usual seventeenth-century definition of measure organization.

Accent was certainly known and accepted in performance: for example, Mersenne describes drumming:

Quelques-vns battent le Tambour si viste, que l’esprit, ou l’imagination ne peut comprendre la multitude des coups qui tombent sur la peau comme vne grefle tres-impestueuse, parmi laquelle les Tambours qui battent la quaisse en perfection frappent quelque-fois auec tant de violence, que son bruit imite celuy des mousquets, ou des canons, & que l’on admire comment vn simple parchemin peut endurer de si grands coups sans se creuer. En second lieu, que ces grands coups, qui excedent de beaucoup la force des autres, seruent pour marquer, & pour distinguer les mesures, & pour finir les cadences. L’on frappe aussi quelque-fois la peau proche des bords, mais le plus souuent au milieu, ce qui distingue vn peu les sons en les rendant plus clairs, ou plus plains.⁶

Some beat the drum so fast that the mind or the imagination cannot comprehend the multitude of blows that fall on the skin like a very violent hailstorm. Drummers who beat the drum perfectly strike some blows among the others with so much violence that the sound rivals that of muskets or cannons, and one wonders how a simple parchment can endure such great blows without splitting. Secondarily, these great blows, which exceed the force of the others by so much, serve to mark and distinguish measures and cadences. Sometimes the sounds may also be made a little clearer or plainer by striking the drum-head close to the edges, even though most strokes are made in the middle.

In the seventeenth century, definitions of measure organization usually did not include reference to accent or dynamic stress. Nevertheless, we assume that accent or stress was used for metrical articulation on those instruments capable of it. Accent in the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries was one of many devices of measure articulation.

The three discussions of accent offered by Callcott, the Philosophical Essay, and Mersenne’s drummer are quite different from one another. Johann Mattheson offers a definition that suggests that he understands accent as a gentle stress:

Ein Accent in den Noten ist der innerliche Gehalt und Nachdruck derselben/ welcher so placirt ist/ dass dadurch eine Note vor der andern/ ohne Ansehen ihrer äusserlichen Gestalt und gewöhnlichen Geltung/ zu gewissen Zeiten hervorraget. Das ist die definitio. Das Wort kommt her von cartere und ad, als wolte man sagen: ad canere, mitsingen: weil solche Noten/ die dergleichen accentum haben/ natülicher Weise/ einem jeden dergestalt eminenter ins Gehör fallen/ dass er sie gleichsam mitzusingen/ und ihnen beyzustimmen genöthiget wird. Das ist die Etymologia.⁷

An accent on a note is its own inner content and emphasis, so placed that a note stands out from another, without consideration of its apparent size and its ordinary value in a given time. This is the definition. The word derives from canere and ad, as if to say ad canere, “singing together.” Such a note, which is naturally accented, is eminent to the ear to such a degree that it invites you to accompany it and agree with it. That is the etymology.

Heinrich Christoph Koch favors a moderate stress for accent:

Man verstehe hier diessen Ausdruck Gewicht oder Nachdruck nicht unrecht, und glaube, dass ich derjenigen schlechten Spielart der Bogeninstrumente das Wort reden wolle, bey welcher man den Tonen, auf welchen schon von selbste vermöge der Tacteintheiling dieser Nachdruck vorhanden ist, einen so starken Nachdruck mit dem Bogen giebt, und die andern, denen dieser innere Nachdruck mangelt, so leichte mit der Boden abfertigt, dass die daraus entstehende Speilart dem Gange eines hinkenden gleich wird.⁸

Don’t misunderstand this expression “weight” or “emphasis” and believe that I would apply these words to that bad kind of string playing that gives a very strong emphasis with the bow in spite of the fact that the notes themselves contain the actual division of beats, and plays the other notes, lacking this inner accent, so lightly that the consequent performance proceeds by a kind of hobble.

We can divide late eighteenth-century theorists into three categories: first, those who include accent as a part of the definition of quantitas intrinseca; second, those who give passing mention to measure organization equated with accent; and third, those who define the measure as identified by an accent imposed by the performer.

Mattheson’s use of the term innerliche Gehalt (inner content) associates his discussion of accent with quantitas intrinseca. The clarity of J. A. Scheibe’s explanation of quantitas intrinseca comes from linking it with accent:

Unsere eigene Empfindung lehret uns, wenn wir singen oder spielen, oder nur eine Musik anhören, dass die Noten, wenn sie schon dem äusserlichen Ausehen oder der äusserlichen Grösse nach, nach der man eine gegen die andere betrachtet, und gleichsam abweiget, gleich gross oder klein zu seyn scheinen, gleichwohl niemals von einerley oder einander ganz ähnlichen Grösse, Länge oder Kürze sind oder seyn können; ja, dass sogar niemals zwo Noten von einerley Gehalt oder Grösse einander innerlich vollig gleich sind. Wir müssen also diese Beschaffenheit und ungleich innerliche Grösse, diese sogenannte Quantitatem intrinsecam die insonderheit auf die Melodien, und dadurch auch auf die Harmonie einen grossen einfiuss hat, vorzuglich aber in der Vokalmusik von äusserster Wichtigkeit ist, genau untersuchen, und soglich die Noten, eine gegen die andere, gehörig abwägen lernen. ⁹

Es ist schon angemerket worden, dass der allegemeinen Regel der Niederschlag eines Taktes lang, d.i. anschlagend, der Aufschlag aber kurz, d.i. durchgehend seyn sollte; allein ich habe zugleich gezeigt, dass diese Regel nicht eben ohne Ausnahme ist, oder sich doch wenigstens nicht auf alle Fälle und Taktarten schickt, wohl aber, dass der erste Theil des Aufschlages sowohl als des Niederschlages lang, der andere Theil beyder aber kurz wäre.

Wenn ich also im Zweizweitheiltakte eine jede halbe Taktnote in zwo Viertheilnoten zertheile: so ist der erste Viertheilnote einer jeden halben Taktnote die anschlagende Note und also innerliche lang, und eine jede zwote Viertheilnote eben derselben halben Taktnote ist die durchgehende Note und also innerliche kurz; und zwar aus dieser Ursache, weil auf die erste Note der Accent oder der Ton fällt, welcher der folgenden zwoten Noten mangelt; denn zwo Noten von einerley Geltung können nicht alle beyde den Ton oder den Accent haben.¹⁰

When we play, sing, or only listen to music, our feeling tells us that in considering or weighing notes of the same appearance or size one against another, though they seem to be of equal duration, they are, or they give the impression of being, either longer or shorter, even though of entirely equal value or content. We must examine this unequal intrinsic size, the so-called Quantitatem intrinsecam, which has a great influence, especially on melody, and through it on harmony. It is particularly important that we learn to weigh the notes one against another in vocal music.

I have given the general rule that the downbeat of a measure should be long, that is struck; and the upbeat short, that is passing. But I have also shown that this rule is not without exception, or at least it is not so in all cases and measures, because the first part of the upbeat is sometimes as long as the first part of the downbeat, and the second parts of both are short. . . .

If each half note in 2/2 measure is divided into two quarter notes, the first quarter note is “struck” and therefore inwardly long, and the second quarter note is “passing” and therefore inwardly short, because the accent comes on the first note and is lacking on the second note. Therefore two notes of the same value cannot both have the accent.

We also find in Walther,¹¹ Adlung,¹² Kirnberger,¹³ and Koch¹⁴ that accent, “inner length,” and the quantitas intrinseca were considered different terms for the same thing.

Adlung uses the word “accent” in relation to thesis and arsis and gives the impression that “accent” is a term of recent popularity with musicians:

Heut zu Tage redet man viel von accentuirten Noten, wodurch die längern oder in Thesi stehenden verstanden werden. Diese Lehre heisst de quantitate notarum intrinseca, und hat sehr viel auf sich. ¹⁵

Nowadays there is much talk of accented notes, by which the long notes, those included in the down-beat are understood. This subject is called Quantitas notarum intrinseca, and is of great importance.

Daniel Gottlob Türk, a musician well aware of the traditions of eighteenth- century practice, explains the measure through accent; he even gives an example that places forte on the first quarter note, mezzoforte on the second, and so on, in order to clarify what he means.

Anm. 3. Jede Taktart hat gute und schlechte Takttheile, das heisst, obgleich z. B. alle Viertel, ihrem äussern Werthe oder Dauer nach, einander gleich sind, wie in den nachstehenden Beyspielen, so liegt doch auf Einem mehr Nachdruck, (innerer Werth,) als auf dem Andern. Denn Jeder fühlt dass bey a) von zwey, und bey b) von drey Vierteln jedesmal das erste wichtiger ist, als das zweyte &c. [Ex. 6.1].

Aus diesem Grunde werden auch die guten Takttheile innerlich lange, anschlagende, accentuirte &genannt. Beym Taktschlagen fallen sie in die Zeit des Niederschlagens (thesis).¹⁶

Each measure has good and bad beats, which requires that among all quarter notes, although alike in their external value or duration (as in the following examples), some have more emphasis (inner value) than others. For everyone feels that in a) of each group of two notes, and in b) of each group of three, the first note is more important than the second, and so forth [Ex. 6.1]. For this reason, good beats are also said to be internally long, struck, or accented beats. In beating time, they occur on the downbeat (thesis).

EX. 6.1

Tartini used the word “accent” but coupled it with “long and short.”

Dalle cadenze ridotte a battuta nascono gli accenti musicali, cioè accenti lunghi, e brevi nello stesso senso, che sillabe lunghe, e brevi. . . . È certo, che noi abbiamo nella musica le note corrispondenti al valor delle sillabe, dato per esempio un dattilo nella parola bārbără, abbiamo in giustissima relazione una minima, e due semiminime, perche la minima vale due semiminime, e perö in precisione la minima è la silliba lunga, le due semiminime sono le due sillabe brevi. . . . Dunque appare, che adattando un dattilo a tre note musicali en genere, la prima delle quali vaglia il doppio delle due seguenti, sia conservata rogorosamente la natura di quantità delle tre sillabe; cioè la prima lunga, e le altre due brevi. Appare, ma non è. La cagione non dipende dal valor delle note, le quali rigorosamente ne’dati essempi corrispondono al valor delle date sillabe. Dipende da luogo della battuta, dove si porrano le tre note suddette. Sia il tempo ordinario, ch’e il più comune, e le tre sillabe siano espresse da una semiminime, e da due crome. Ecco in quanti luoghi della battuta di tempo ordinario è possibile la posizione [Ex. 6.2].

Altre posizione non sono possibili, perché si torna alla prima. Ora è un fatto, che la prima, e la terza posizione risponde esattamente al valor delle sillabe. La seconda, e la quarta non risponde altrimente, perché la seconda sillabe, ch’è breve, di venta lunga, e il risultato della pronunzia musicale ad onta della nota breve, e contro la volontà del musico è realmente bārbāră. Le note musicali essendo sempre le stesse, il dattilo sempre. Lo stesso, e chiaro, che la ragione del cambiomento della sillaba breve in lunga è il luogo, e non altro.¹⁷

From meter regulated by the beat arise musical accents, that is to say long and short accents in the same sense as long and short syllables. . . . Given, for example, a dactylic foot [long, short, short] in the word Bārbără, we have an exact relationship to a half-note and two quarter notes, , because the half-note is worth two quarters and the half note equals the long, and the quarters the two short syllables. . . . Therefore, adapting a dactyl in this manner, it appears that the first note is worth double the two following and thus the quantitative nature of the three syllables is rigorously preserved. It appears so, but it is not so. This doesn’t depend on the value of the notes, which in this example rigorously correspond to the value of the given syllables, but on the position of the three notes in relation to the measure. In a measure of common time, using a quarter note and two eighths to express the three syllables we shall see how many positions these notes can occupy in the measure [Ex. 6.2].

EX. 6.2

Other positions are not possible because the next would repeat the first. Now it is a fact that the first and third positions correspond exactly to the value of the syllables. The second and the fourth do not, because the second syllable which is short becomes long; the result of this musical pronunciation, in spite of the short note, and against the will of the musician, is really Bär bar a. As the musical notes are always the same and the dactyl is always the same, it is clear that the reason for the change of the short syllable into a long one is the placement [in the measure] and nothing else.

This discussion is nearly identical to the explanations of word-music accentuation given by Printz and Koch, and all use vocal accent in explaining the perception of meter in music. Tartini went on to describe the “long accent” as desirable, and he also gave an account of orchestral playing where:

Per cui una Orchestra intiera per lo piu si accorda nell’accentare, o sia percuotere con maggior forza la prima nota di ciascun quarto del tempo ordinario, e molto più le due note del battere, e levare dal tempo alia breve, perché o cosi se vede batter la misura dal direttore della Orchestra, o cosi ciascuno batte da se o co’l piede, o con la mente.¹⁸

An entire orchestra comes together better by accenting, or striking with greater force, the first note of each quarter of ordinary time, and this is even more true for the two notes of the down and up beat of the tempo alia breve, whether the director of the orchestra is seen to beat the measure or whether each one beats it to himself with his foot, or in his mind.

The impression left by the preceding definitions is that the measure is governed by a perception of notes distinguished by “inner” length or brevity but enhanced by dynamic stress.

Let us now consider those late eighteenth-century writers who, in their brief mention of measure organization, indicated that accent alone defined metrical structure. Some writers were forced by limited space—in dictionaries, for example—to curtail their discussion of measure organization and to simplify it. Others seemed not to be interested in meter, almost as if they considered it to be inconsequential to overall rhythmic organization.

Rousseau’s Dictionnaire de musique states succinctly:

Des divers temps d’une measure, il y en a de plus sensibles, de plus marqués que d’autres, quoique de valeurs égales: le temps qui marque davantage s’appelle temps fort; celui qui marque moins s’appelle temps foible: C’est ce que M. Rameau, dans son Traité d’Harmonie, appelle temps bon et temps mauvais. Les Temps forts sont, le premier dans la mesure à deux temps; le premier et le troisième dans les mesures à trois et quatre: à l’égard du second temps, il est: toujours foible dans toutes les mesures, et il en est de même du quatrième dans la mesure à quatres temps. ¹⁹

Of the different beats of a measure, there are some more prominent and stressed than the others, although they are of equal duration: The beat that is stressed is called strong beat; that which is less marked is called weak beat. These are what M. Rameau in his treatise on harmony calls good beats and bad beats. The strong beats are the first in two-beat measures, and the first and third in three- and four-beat measures. The second beat is always weak in all measures, and it is the same with the fourth in the four-beat measure.

The difference between Rousseau’s definition and that of his contemporary Holden may be due to the space limitations of the Dictionnaire. The words “strong” and “weak,” without further qualification, convey an image of the accent.

Charles Burney wrote this article for Dr. Rees’s early nineteenth-century Cyclopedia:

Accent, in music. In the mechanism of melody, or measured musical tones, musicians have long agreed to regard the first and third notes of a bar, in common time, whether vocal or instrumental, as accented, and the second and fourth notes as unaccented. In triple time, divided into three portions, the first note and last are accented, the second unaccented. But these accents are variously modified; often to produce some comic effect, as wantonly limping, to ridicule lameness. If the third note in triple time is accented in serious music, it is always less forcibly marked than the first.²⁰

Dr. Burney went on at length, but supplied no definition of “accent.”

Ballière de Laissement,²¹ Antoniotto,²² Kollmann,²³ William Jones of Nayland,²⁴ and Momigny²⁵ also briefly discussed accentual measure organization without defining accent. All of these writers expanded upon the subject of larger rhythmical organization, such as phrase and period structure, which held more interest for them than did meter.²⁶ Abbreviated treatment of measure organization does not imply that these late eighteenth-century writers were modernists in their musical outlook. Jones, in particular, preferred the music of Handel, Corelli, and Geminiani to that of his own day.²⁷

In the third category of eighteenth-century writers are those who define the measure by an accent provided by the performer. This idea is increasingly popular and demonstrates that quantitative meter is out of date by the end of the eighteenth century.

The most explicit equation of accent with measure definition was by Leopold Mozart in his Violinschule. Perhaps he valued accent so highly because the violin is capable of such elegant and varied dynamic stress.

Meistens fällt der Accent der Ausdruck oder die Stärke des Tones auf die herrschende oder anschlagende Note, welche die Italiäner Nota buona nennen. Diese anschlagende oder gute Noten sind merklich von einander unterschieden. Die sonderbar herrschende Noten sind folgende: in iedem Tact die das erste Viertheil anschlagende Note; die erste Note des halben Tactes oder dritten Viertheils im Vierviertheil tacte; die erste Note des ersten und vierten Viertheils 6/4 und 6/8 Tacte; und die erste Note des ersten, vierten, siebenten und zehenden Viertheils im 12/8 Tacte. Diese nun mögen jene anschlagende Noten heissen, auf die allemal die meiste Stärke des Tones fällt: wenn anders der Componist keinen andern Ausdruck hingesetzet hat. Bey dem gemeinen Accompagnieren einer Arie oder einer Con-certstimme, wo meistens nur Achttheilnoten oder Sechszehntheilnoten vorkommen, werden sie itzt meistens abgesondert hingeschrieben, oder wenigst Anfangs ein paar Tacte mit einem kleinen Striche bemerket [Ex. 6.3]. Man muss also auf solche Art fortfahren die erste Note stark anzustossen, bis eine Abänderung vorkömmt.

Die andern guten Noten sind die, welche zwar allezeit durch eine kleine Stärke von den übrigen unterschieden sind; bey denen man aber die Stärke sehr gemässiget anbringen muss. Es sind nämlich die Viertheilnoten und Achtheilnoten im Allabreve Tacte, und die Viertheilnoten in dem so genannten halben Trippel; ferner die Achtheilnoten und Sechzehntheilnoten im geraden und auch im 2/4 und 3/4 Tacte; und endlich die Sechzehntheilnoten im 3/8 und 6/8 u. s. f. Wenn nun dergleichen mehrere Noten nacheinander folgen, über deren zwo und zwo ein Bogen stehet: so fällt auf die erste der zwoen der Accent, und sie wird nicht nur etwas stärker angespielet, sondern auch etwas länger angehalten; die zwo te aber wird ganz gelind, und still, auch etwas später daran geschleiset. . . . Es sind aber auch oft 3,4, und noch mehrere Noten durch einen solchen Bogen und Halbcirkel zusammen verbunden. In solchem Falle muss man die erste derselben etwas stärker anstossen, und ein wenig länger anhalten, die übrigen hingegen durch Abnehmung der Stärke immer stiller, ohne mindesten Nachdruck, in dem nämlichen Striche daran schleifen.²⁸

EX. 6.3

Generally the expressive accent or stress falls on the predominant or struck note, which the Italians call Nota buona. These struck or good notes, however, differ perceptibly from each other. The specially predominant notes are as follows: in every measure, the first note of the first quarter of the measure is a struck note; the first note of the half-bar or third quarter in four-quarter time; the first note of the first and fourth quarters in 6/4 time and 6/8 time; and the first note of the first, fourth, seventh and tenth quarters in 12/8 time. Each of these may be called struck notes, the ones on which the chief stress always falls if the composer has indicated no other expression. In the ordinary accompaniment to an aria or a concert piece, where for the most part only eighths or sixteenths occur, they are now usually written detached, or at the least, a few bars at the beginning are marked with a small stroke [Ex. 6.3]. One must continue to accent the first note strongly in the same manner until a change occurs.

The other good notes are those which are always distinguished from the remainder by a small stress, but on which the stress must be applied with great moderation. They are, namely, quarters and eighths in allabreve time, and quarters in the so-called half-note triple; further, there are eighths and sixteenths in common time and also in 2/4 and 3/4 time: and finally sixteenths in 3/8 and 6/8 time, and so on. Now if several notes of this kind follow each other, over which, two by two a slur is placed, then the accent falls on the first of the two, and it is not only played somewhat louder, but also sustained rather longer; while the second is slurred on to it quite smoothly and quietly and somewhat late. . . . But often three, four and even more notes are bound together by a slur and half circle. In this case, the first must be somewhat more strongly accented and sustained longer; the others on the contrary, are slurred in the same stroke with a diminishing tone, more and more quietly without the slightest accent.

Leopold Mozart’s insistent use of the words “accent” and “stress” and the dynamic indications in his musical examples are striking. He limited his forte to mean “played rather more strongly,” and there are so many places where accents are to be played in his examples that the effect of any individual accent seems diminished. His directions about the performance of slurs are of special interest since such phrasing marks were not often used before the mid-eighteenth century. The similarity of Leopold Mozart’s bowing directions to those of Muffat has been mentioned, but Muffat did not use the word “accent” in defining meter.

William Tans’ur advocated the imposition of accent as a means of measure organization:

This is what is called the Accented, and Unaccented parts of the Measure; which the Italians call Tempo Buono, or Time-Good; and Tempo-Cattivo, or Time or Measure-Bad; that is to say, the good and bad, parts of the Measure, etc.

In Common Time, the first Notes of the beginning of a Bar, and the first Notes of the last half of the Bar is the Accented Part; that is, the first and third Crotchet of every Bar, the rest being the Unaccented Parts: but in Tripla-Time (where notes go by three and three) the first of the three is the accented part, and the rest the unaccented.

The accented Parts should be always as full of Harmony as possible, and as void of Discords as may be, in order to render the Composition the more affecting: but the unaccented parts may consist of Discords, and the like, without any great offence to the Ear, etc. This being a part of music, that few or no Authors have very rarely mentioned; although it is the whole Ornament and Spirit of every Composition, especially when any person performs alone.

In Common Time, remember well by Heart,

The first and third is the accented part:

And if your Music Tripla-Time should be,

Your Accent is the first of ev’ry three²⁹

By such verses, Tans’ur attempted to make elementary musical concepts memorable to the student. Tans’ur’s book was widely read; many young musicians learned from him to impose accent as the sole indication of measure organization.

Theorists of the later eighteenth century became much more interested in defining phrase structure and less interested in musical meter. Perhaps the growing number of musical amateurs, the readers of Tans’ur’s music primers, found the simplified concepts of an accentual measure easier to learn.

A rich variety of articulation techniques was known to seventeenth-and eighteenth-century performers. The right pronunciation of the musical styles of the time included the most subtle and artful devices, which seem to be wonderfully effective on the instruments of their own time. These devices, however, are less effective when attempted on modern instruments. The performers of the late eighteenth century employed accent in addition to these techniques and evolved a dramatic, forceful style suitable to the music of C. P. E. Bach, Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven.

Although meter may seem to be a comparatively small element of a performance style, the metrical impulse in music is fundamental. A change such as the use of dynamic accent can strike a listener as profound. If Clementi’s comment about the predominance of a new legato style in the early years of the nineteenth century is reliable, accentuation must have become necessary to clarify meter and to mark important harmonic and melodic points because of the lack of articulation silences. We may be able to sense the quality of this new style of performance, smoothly lyrical with heightened dynamic stress, and also to see more clearly an earlier performance style that used dynamic accent rarely or not at all.

Quantitative articulation employed many and varied techniques, carefully weighed note durations and silences and delicate differences in the beginnings and endings of notes brought about by bowings, tonguings, fingerings, and tone color. The technique taught to beginning performers was securely based on a recognition of meter.

Singing style offered the important model of word articulation to instrumentalists; with more limited expressive capacities than the voice, instruments developed elaborate and complicated techniques in order to compete in clarity and expressiveness. Pronunciation and meter need to be balanced by the lyric and dramatic impulses of music; a performer first must establish a firm foundation of metrical order upon which to raise the great arch of expressive song.