# "What is a great rhythm?" - or, "Is melody rightly deemed most important?"



## Guest (Sep 25, 2016)

*"What is a great rhythm?" - or, "Is melody rightly deemed most important?"*

A search for discussions about melody brings up three pages of thread titles. Though mostly enquiries from people trying to identify a tune, there is a small handful of thoughts about the importance of melody.

A similar search for 'rhythm' brings up less than a full page - 19 results - with only a poll comparing it to melody, sound, tone-colour and harmony resembling a discussion on comparative merits or importance.

Arguably (and by that I mean it _could _be argued and that it probably has been, somewhere; I don't mean that I _am _arguing, or that it _must _be argued) what distinguishes most music (from other forms of sound communication) is not melody, but rhythm. There is no doubt that many listeners are attracted to music that has a prominent 'tune', and for some, it is the most important defining component; "If it ain't got a sweet melody, it ain't music."

But it seems to me that without an accompanying rhythm - and orchestration, and timbre, and...and...and (fill in with your own most important musical element) 'melody' is no more significant than any other. Furthermore, it is the patterning of the beat that tends to mark out music*. The endless search for exactly the right interpretation of your favourite symphony is prompted not by wanting to find only the version with the best melody, but the one with exactly the right combination - to your ears, at least - of all that the music comprises.

Does it matter that some great thinkers on music have made declarations about who writes great melodies and who doesn't, when melodies are not the only fruit?

[*Just to be clear - there is much music of the experimental type which provides easy examples of that which will contradict this notion - but let's stick to the broad mainstream of classical for now, eh?]


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

Nice point for discussion. I nominate the last movement of Sibelius' Violin Concerto as evidence that a driving rhythm can be more important to the music than melody alone. Likewise last movement of Beethoven's 7th.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

One would think that, so long as the musical notes are staccato, rhythm is/must be integrally bonded to melody--is defined by the melody. If the notes are purely legato, then rhythm can become somewhat detached from the melodic line, being perceived at cusp points in the line where we find the highest and lowest notes. Or is added in a separate, staccato accompaniment. The preceding remarks are written by an ignoramus when it comes to musical notation and structure, so give them the attention they deserve.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Excellent topic.

I suspect melody so often gets first billing because, in the repertoire under discussion here, it tends to fully subsume rhythm and partly subsume harmony, meter and other parameters. That is, one can have rhythm without melody, one cannot have melody without rhythm; one can have complex and coherent harmonic progression with minimal melodic interest, but the sense of purpose and the gradations of tension in a good melody often depend on how harmonic progression shapes the tonal space through which it passes. The Russian formalist literary theorists had a concept for expressing this kind of aesthetic subsumption. I think it was Victor Shklovsky (sorry for the possible inaccuracy - Roman Jacobson might have used it too? - it's been a while) who came up with the concept of the _dominant_ to describe that parameter or principle of construction that yokes all of the others together in an aesthetic object or, more broadly, in a style or era. A prime example of how one might use this concept in music would be in understanding the evolution of sonata form. In the Classical Era the _dominant_ of sonata construction was tonal/harmonic structure - the move to the dominant key before the double bar, the tonal journey of the development, and the integration of all material in the tonic key during the recap, these were the events that defined the form; the _dominant_ of construction shifted to the melodic sphere in the Romantic Era, which is when the form began to be described as a series of melodic events - principal theme, transition, secondary theme, closing, and so on.

So, to put my hypothesis in these terms: Melody gets first billing because melodic structure is the dominant of construction in the repertoire from which great-melody threads tend to pull their melodies. It is the through line by which form and coherence are defined and it subsumes the other parameters in fulfilling this role.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

What happens when you have a polyrhythm? Beethoven's Third Symphony or Sixth String Quartet for example.

I'm currently playing a Grieg Nocturne (Op 54 no 4) which has a 2 against 3 rhythm and a Gershwin Prelude with swung eighth notes against quarter notes, with occasional quarter note triplets for variety. In both of these, although we're trying to bring out the melody line it has to be balanced against the rhythmic structure.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

It's surprising how many of music's great themes have absolutely distinct rhythmic patterns -- in that you could identify many of them just by someone tapping them out on a table. It's not the beat per se (as in much popular music, which is, face it, musically boring -- much of it). It's the rhythmic profile of the theme.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

EdwardBast posts:"You cannot have melody without rhythm." Please explain this. What if we are dealing with an unaccompanied Theremin or slide whistle, producing a legato stream of tones, "sin compás", that is, without a rhythmic pattern? Just curious (I can't think of an example right here and now).


----------



## Zhdanov (Feb 16, 2016)

melody is based on rhythm.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> One would think that, so long as the musical notes are staccato, rhythm is/must be integrally bonded to melody--is defined by the melody. If the notes are purely legato, then rhythm can become somewhat detached from the melodic line, being perceived at cusp points in the line where we find the highest and lowest notes. Or is added in a separate, staccato accompaniment. The preceding remarks are written by an ignoramus when it comes to musical notation and structure, so give them the attention they deserve.


Although the notes are legato - joined - they represent different pitches and each pitch has a duration before it changes to the next pitch. The rhythm and the melody although interlinked are quite separate and the melody does not define the rhythm. The simplest examples are folk melodies used for dancing where the metre or time signature is fixed - 4/4 in the case I'm thinking of - but the rhythm can be varied to produce a Strathspey, a reel, a Hornpipe, a scottische or even a form of polka depending on tempo and how you "adjust" or dot the quavers.



Strange Magic said:


> EdwardBast posts:"You cannot have melody without rhythm." Please explain this. What if we are dealing with an unaccompanied Theremin or slide whistle, producing a legato stream of tones, "sin compás", that is, without a rhythmic pattern? Just curious (I can't think of an example right here and now).


A melody is defined as a set of pitches and durations. The examples you quote have pitches without duration so although they may be musical, they can not be a melody as such.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I can bang out "Mary had a little lamb" with my fist on a piano, and you will recognize it by the rhythm and the general contour, not by the pitches.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Y-u c-n w-rk -ut wh-t I -m s-y-ng -f I m-ss m-st -f th- v-w-ls o-t.

That doesn't make it a "proper" sentence. The melodic contour is important but the true melody is contained in the exact pitches.


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

Zhdanov said:


> melody is based on rhythm.


So, does a melody change when played in a different rhythm?

To me, when I hear the original version of "Favorite Things" from the "The Sound of Music", then I hear John Coltrane's version played in a different rhythm, the same melody in both versions seems obvious.

Or, the German prog-fusion band, Panzerballett, play many standards in drastically different rhythms than the original, yet again, the same melody is discerbable. They do a version of Brubeck's "Take Five", that they have rechristened "Fake Five", and play it in 2 different time signatures at the same time.

Or, on a much more crass example, the 70's Disco hit, "A Fifth of Beethoven", is also played in a much more simple rhythm than the original, but again, the same melody cab be heard in both versions.

But as a near musical theory illiterate, I may be using a colloquial definition of the term "melody" that may not the same as formal definition.


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

Good topic!

I recently heard an amateur pianist play one of Albeniz' _Spanish Dances_ - she played the correct notes but there was no 'dance' (and no 'Spanish', for that matter, either). The 'melody' needed much more than the correct notes to make a convincing performance


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Simon Moon said:


> So, does a melody change when played in a different rhythm?
> 
> To me, when I hear the original version of "Favorite Things" from the "The Sound of Music", then I hear John Coltrane's version played in a different rhythm, the same melody in both versions seems obvious.
> 
> ...


Your implicit definition is correct. A melody is usually defined and recognized by its sequence of pitches.


----------



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

Can I just mention that one part of Rite of Spring where it's like just straight eighth notes or something (I don't know) but they continually change accents? Is that rhythm? Am I stupid for asking this? I love that part, in any case. I suppose my question is whether accent can make rhythm even when all the notes are the same duration.


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

The answer is yes and goes back way back when, and a dynamic accent inevitably makes that note slightly longer anyway. I tend to find it tedious when the music has mostly this accent based rhythm and little or inconsequencial agogic accent, I'm pretty sure a lot of people feel the exact opposite.


----------



## Guest (Sep 27, 2016)

Woodduck said:


> Your implicit definition is correct. A melody is usually defined and recognized by its sequence of pitches.


But isn't the rate of delivery of the pitches, the accents, the grouping, the length of time each pitch is held - aren't these all integral to the melody? Are the first four notes of Beethoven's 5th a melody, a rhythm, or both?


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

MacLeod said:


> But isn't the rate of delivery of the pitches, the accents, the grouping, the length of time each pitch is held - aren't these all integral to the melody? Are the first four notes of Beethoven's 5th a melody, a rhythm, or both?





Taggart said:


> The rhythm and the melody although interlinked are quite separate and the melody does not define the rhythm. The simplest examples are folk melodies used for dancing where the metre or time signature is fixed - 4/4 in the case I'm thinking of - but the rhythm can be varied to produce a Strathspey, a reel, a Hornpipe, a scottische or even a form of polka depending on tempo and how you "adjust" or dot the quavers.


The opening of Beethoven's 5th is a melody with a specific rhythm and accents.

What is integral to the melody is the metre or the time signature. What happens off the beat or even on the upbeats is not quite so relevant.



Dedalus said:


> Can I just mention that one part of Rite of Spring where it's like just straight eighth notes or something (I don't know) but they continually change accents? Is that rhythm? Am I stupid for asking this? I love that part, in any case. I suppose my question is whether accent can make rhythm even when all the notes are the same duration.





Headphone Hermit said:


> Good topic!
> 
> I recently heard an amateur pianist play one of Albeniz' _Spanish Dances_ - she played the correct notes but there was no 'dance' (and no 'Spanish', for that matter, either). The 'melody' needed much more than the correct notes to make a convincing performance


The definition of a waltz is a dance in 3/4 time. The only way to make it danceable is to accent the downbeat to bring out the 1-2-3 feel of the dance. If you take a waltz melody you can play about off the beat with swing but you must hit the basic 1-2-3 for the main notes. The metre of a piece allows you to take liberties off beat provided you hit the main beats. That's what I was saying above about moving between reel, strathspey, hornpipe and scottische. The melody is the same, it has the same basic 4 beats in a bar but you vary the off beats - reel is fairly steady usually eighth notes; hornpipe uses dotted eighth notes and a sixteenth note in a regular pattern; strathspey uses the snap of a sixteenth note followed by an eighth note. You also vary the tempo - a reel is typically around 120, a hornpipe around 100 and a strathspey around 70. But it's the same basic melody with the main pitches occuring on the main beats.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> EdwardBast posts:"You cannot have melody without rhythm." Please explain this. What if we are dealing with an unaccompanied Theremin or slide whistle, producing a legato stream of tones, "sin compás", that is, without a rhythmic pattern? Just curious (I can't think of an example right here and now).


Sorry, I missed this post. What you are describing is just another kind of rhythm: the smooth and regular kind.  In these cases there is usually metric organization that exerts rhythmic patterning. And the points where the unbroken lines change direction comprise patterns. Rhythmic ones.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

MacLeod said:


> But isn't the rate of delivery of the pitches, the accents, the grouping, the length of time each pitch is held - aren't these all integral to the melody? Are the first four notes of Beethoven's 5th a melody, a rhythm, or both?


Yes, of course they are, which is probably why Woodduck said "a melody is _usually_ defined and recognized by its sequence of pitches." There are also many melodies in which a characteristic rhythm is a critical defining factor.

The first four notes of Beethoven's 5th comprise a motive, not a melody, a motive strongly defined by rhythm. As discussed in other threads, however, the words melody and melodic each have two standard usages, specific and general. In the specific sense, melody usually equates with theme, so, in the case of Beethoven's Fifth, the opening melody comprises at least the first long phrase. In the general sense melody defines a musical parameter broadly, and used this way, one would say that motives are melodic elements.


----------



## Zhdanov (Feb 16, 2016)

Simon Moon said:


> So, does a melody change when played in a different rhythm?


depends on how different the rhythm would be.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

A melody is a sequence of pitches and durations. You can alter both the pitches and the durations a little bit and it will still be recognizable as "the same melody," but only a little. I wouldn't say the pitch is more essential than the rhythm. The most important things are probably the shape (steps and leaps, how large, whether they go up or down) and where the accents fall.


----------



## Guest (Sep 27, 2016)

EdwardBast said:


> The first four notes of Beethoven's 5th comprise a motive, not a melody,


But if those first four notes are a sequence of pitches, why aren't they a melody?


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

MacLeod said:


> But if those first four notes are a sequence of pitches, why aren't they a melody?


I think the general distinction is that a melody is longer than just 4 notes, whereas shorter fragments are called motives and are used to develop a melody.


----------



## Guest (Sep 27, 2016)

TwoFlutesOneTrumpet said:


> I think the general distinction is that a melody is longer than just 4 notes, whereas shorter fragments are called motives and are used to develop a melody.


Whose general distinction? Earlier a general definition of a melody seemed to have been accepted, but now it's being said that if it's below minimum threshold (four? five? six?) it's not a melody. Are the first three notes of Three Blind Mice a melody or not?


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

To be a melody, it has to have a harmonic context to give the pitches meaning. In Beethoven's Fifth, the motif of four notes is stated in octaves and unisons, without harmonic context, as well as the next four notes. Thus, it stands alone as a motif.

It's a major third, so we tend to hear a major third down, or a minor sixth up, as moving *to *I, not away from I. This makes the second sustained note even stronger than the rhythm already made it.

Conversely, we tend to hear a major third up, or a minor sixth down, as moving *away* from I to a weaker position.

It's not until the accompaniment kicks in do we hear the motif as 5-5-5-b3. Now it has a harmonic context, and, if not a full-fledged melody, is being used "melodically."

Of course, you have to remember the very first time you had ever heard this, in order for this to be proven to you.

There's also some rhythmic ambiguity here. We usually hear the first event as "1," so the motif sounds *1*_-2-3-_*1, *as if in triple time; but it turns out to be _and-4-and *1, *_as if in 4 time.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

MacLeod said:


> Whose general distinction? Earlier a general definition of a melody seemed to have been accepted, but now it's being said that if it's below minimum threshold (four? five? six?) it's not a melody. Are the first three notes of Three Blind Mice a melody or not?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melody

"Melodies often consist of one or more musical phrases or motifs".

In the case of Beethoven's 5th, the first four notes to me sound much more like a motif than a melody, a motif used throughout the symphony to create melodies.


----------



## Guest (Sep 27, 2016)

TwoFlutesOneTrumpet said:


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melody
> 
> "Melodies often consist of one or more musical phrases or motifs".
> 
> In the case of Beethoven's 5th, the first four notes to me sound much more like a motif than a melody, a motif used throughout the symphony to create melodies.


The fact that 'melodies often consist' does not mean that 'melodies only consist'.

Before we disappear down a rabbit hole on s ingle point about the definition of melody, I think the real point under discussion here is that melody and rhythm are so inextricably linked that the rhythm of a melody's delivery is as important as the sequence of pitches themselves. That might seem like the bleeding obvious (it does to me at any rate), but for those who give primacy to melody, it might not.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Whether a sequence of notes is called a motif or a melody depends mainly on how it functions in the piece. 

In Beethoven's Fifth the four note motif that begins the first movement functions as the germ from which the first real melody is built, as does the broken motif of a falling fourth and fifth against string tremolos that opens his Ninth. In the Fifth, the rhythm of the motif proves more important than its intervals, and that rhythm appears subsequently in other movements. In the Ninth, descending fourths and fifths are also used to open the scherzo and the first theme of the adagio.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

MacLeod said:


> But if those first four notes are a sequence of pitches, why aren't they a melody?


Because "a sequence of pitches" is not a good definition of melody. The word melody just isn't used that way - to describe, well … to describe motives. If you call them a melody in talking to musicians they will just find the statement off. This is a hard thing to explain, but it is just a matter of standard usage. Essentially, fl fl tr (#24) is right: Melody tends to be used for a longer closed idea ending in a cadence (full or half).


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Mozart used short little "themes" that I would barely classify as melodies. I think everybody tends to think in terms of Tchaikovsky when talking about melody.


----------

