We Are Genetically Wired for Music, But Not Just Six Songs

T  he strength of any piece of music is how well it can simultaneously invoke memory schemas but still surprise us with clever twists and turns that foil our expectations.”
  —  Daniel Levitin, Chatauqua Institution interview, 16-AUG-2007.

I  think that is a mistake. There are more ways in which we reflectively meta-surprise ourselves than the number of ways that music directly surprises us. In fact, many of the pieces that are most-loved are ones that intrigue us by causing us to (re-)experience and rehearse emotions that we treasure. Have a look at David Huron’s new book (link below) for detailed empirical data and discussion of surprise and meta-surprise in music. The key is the prosodic stimuli that we experience with the music, and how the particular prosody of a piece satisfies a listener’s hunger or unmet need. Our need—and consequently our interpretation of the music—differs from time to time, from place to place, from culture to culture. What the pieces in Well-Tempered Clavier mean to me evolves with each passing decade of my life, and with each performance. The same is true of how I perceive the song ‘I Love the Mountains’.”
  —  DSM.

One World or None? The astonishment at Daniel Levitin’s simplistic, reductionistic “Six Songs” meme! So it was that I began reading Levitin’s new book with this chip on my shoulder: ‘How like an ex-rock-producer-turned-academic to reduce everything to neat marketing and packaging!’

S  cience should make everything [out to be] as simple as possible but not simpler [than is possible or factual].”
  —  Albert Einstein.

But the book stayed; it stayed in my hands until I had finished the last page. So I now put up this CMT blog post to enthusiastically recommend that you read it, too.

Daniel Levitin argues in ‘The World in Six Songs’ that all music can be classified into one of six thematic categories:

• friendship,
  
• joy,
  
• comfort,
  
• knowledge,
  
• ritual, and
  
• love.

The motives for composing and performing may be more diverse than these categories, but, according to Levitin, all music is socially ‘normative’ (prescriptive, or reinforcing of social norms) and the reception of each piece by individual listeners and by society as a whole is associated with one of these categories.

T  he right question, after due consideration of music’s diversity, is whether there is a set of functions music performs in human relations. And how might these different functions have influenced the evolution of human emotion, reason, and spirit across distinct intellectual and cultural histories? What role did the musical brain have in shaping human nature?”
  —  Daniel Levitin, The World in Six Songs, p. 7.

Q  uoting the anthropologist Clifford Geertz, [Stanford professor James Ferguson] persuaded me that the right question to ask, in trying to understand music’s universality, is not what all musics have in common, but how they differ... It is in the particulars—the nuances, the overwhelming variety of ways we express ourselves—that one can come to understand best what it means to be a musical human.”
  —  Daniel Levitin, The World in Six Songs, p. 7.

Twenty years ago Alexander Ringer (Professor Emeritus, Univ Illinois Urbana-Champaign) examined the question of whether there is one music ‘world’ or many. And Francois Fetis and Alexander Ellis had ‘classified the human races according to their musical systems’ 100 years before that. Levitin’s new book knowingly caters to current social ‘political correctness’ fixations, but, in my view, scholarship is not advanced by uncritical illustration.

I  don’t like the idea of this at all. How can you tell the story of the world in six songs? Who does this guy think he is telling me what these six songs should be? [A few hours later: ] Hmmm... this is interesting. I think I could come up with six songs to tell the story of the world.”
  —  Willie Nelson.

Levitin’s new book is not scholarly ethnomusicology—it is a humanistic tract written for a popular audience. What I mean to say is that, insofar as comparative musicology tends to reveal in musical terms relatively synoptic and superficial features of human evolution, Levitin’s reduction of music to “six songs” should be considered a kind of ‘historiography’ at best and as a kind of "Voyager spacecraft Golden Record" at worst. The record placed on-board Voyager, which was launched in 1977 and departed the solar system into deep space in 2004, contained material selected for NASA by a committee chaired by Carl Sagan of Cornell University.

W  hy is music so important to us as human beings? What is it about us that seeks music? For many people, music is a way of expressing, sharing, or experiencing emotions that we use as an alternative to language. Music does things that language can’t. As an art form, it allows us to express emotions and ideas over time, as opposed to painting, which does this over space. Why do songs evoke many emotions, that can make us laugh and cry? Because that is the job of music! It is made to do that. Music captures the dynamics of human emotion, their changing nature, the complexity of feeling happy and sad at the same time. When it’s composed well, it can do this better than language, and that’s probably the reason why we, as a species, still have both.”
  —  Daniel Levitin, interview on Voice of America, 20-AUG-2008.

Prof. Sagan and colleagues assembled 115 images and a variety of natural sounds, such as those made by surf, wind, and thunder, and animal sounds, including the songs of birds and whales. To this were added several dozen musical selections from different cultures and timeperiods, plus spoken greetings in fifty-five languages. The first movement of Bach’s Brandenburg concerto No. 2, the Prelude and Fugue in C No. 1 from WTC Book 2, and the gavotte from Partita No. 3 in E for violin were on the disc. Louis Armstrong’s ‘Melancholy Blues’ and Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony and String Quartet No. 13 Op. 130 were on it. Chuck Berry’s ‘Johnny B. Goode’ and the Bulgarian ‘Izlel je Delyo Hajdutin’ were on it. In all, an eclectic 90-min housemix of the past 500 years of music.


The diversity of human feeling and musical expression was not about to be adequately captured on one Golden Record, any more than the tremendous diversity of round musical “pegs” will fit into Levitin’s six square “holes”.

A sign is something which stands for something to somebody. It addresses one or more somebodies. It carries an association with a particular meaning and generally with one or more other signs. It can even create other signs. The sign stands for something: its object. In Peirce’s notion of semiotics, the sign creates in the perceiver’s mind a more developed sign (called an ‘interpretant’). Each of these in turn generates its own chain of interpretants. ‘I Love the Mountains’ (ILTM) generates a litany of its own interpretants. So does Bach’s BWV 862.

In music, pitch, timbre, intensity, or chord progressions may act as signs. Popular music especially trades on these. But all music since time immemorial has also done so. In fact, after reading Levitin’s book (and its mention on p. 108 of how prevalent ‘I-vi-ii-V⁷’ progressions are) I went looking for examples in Baroque music. They’re not difficult to find. Open up Bach’s ‘Well-Tempered Clavier’, for example. Have a look in Book 1 at BWV 862. The chord progression ‘I-vi-ii-V⁷’ is nominally the second most common chord progression in music, ever.

Here we have the little-known duet by J.S. and son C.P.E. Bach, in 1722:


Pieces with I-vi-ii-V⁷ progression:

• I Love the Mountains
  
• Blue Moon
  
• Can’t Help Lovin’ Dat Man
  
• Savin’ All My Love
  
• Try To Remember
  
• Chopin’s Nocturne in E-flat
  
• Bach’s Fugue in A-flat
  
• Millions more…

A  hit song is actually somewhat formulaic—the repetitiveness, the rousing section that leads us to that ever-so-hooky thing that we call a chorus—those things seem to happen over and over in hit songs, whether we like to admit it or not. It’s not necessarily a good song from a musical standpoint, one that uses ‘The Chord That Stops The Planet From Rotating On Its Axis’. I think one of the most difficult things to give students a grasp of is an idea of the dire simplicity of most of the music in a song.”
  —  Jon Aldrich, Berklee College of Music.

[Video was first aired on 15-APR-2008 during the Discovery Channel’s season premiere of “Deadliest Catch” program; went ‘viral’ after that. Arrangment by composer Brian Chapman (Beacon Street Studios, Los Angeles); Creative Director: Glenn Cole; CD/Designer: Bryan Rowles; CD/Copywriter: Jason Norcross; Agency: 72andSunny; Agency Executive Producer: Sam Baerwald; Agency Producer: Angelo Ferrugia; Production Company: Outsider; Director: James Rouse; Director of Photography: Max Goldman; Producer: Jeremy Barrett; Editorial Company: Mad River Post; Editor: Lucas Eskin; Producer (Editorial): Ann Kirk; VFX Artist: Alex Kolansinski; VFX Producer: Helena Lee; Producer (Music): Adrea Lavezzoli]

It never gets old, huh?
Nope.
Kinda makes you wanna... break into song?
Yup.

I love the moun-tains, I love the clear blue skies;
I love big bridg-es, I love when great whites fly--
I love the whole world, and all its sights and sounds.
Boom-Dee-Ah-Dah, Boom-Dee-Ah-Dah, Boom-Dee-Ah-Dah, Boom-Dee-Ah-Dah.

I love the o-cean, I love real dir-ty things;
I love to go fast, I love e-gyp-tian kings--
I love the whole world, and all its cra-zi-ness.
Boom-Dee-Ah-Dah, Boom-Dee-Ah-Dah, Boom-Dee-Ah-Dah, Boom-Dee-Ah-Dah.

I love tor-na-does, I love a-rach-a-nids;
I love hot mag-ma, I love the gi-ant squids--
I love the whole world, it’s such a brill-iant place.
Boom-Dee-Ah-Dah, Boom-Dee-Ah-Dah, Boom-Dee-Aht-Tah, Boom-Dee-Ah-Dah.

    [50-sec clip, Brian Chapman et al., DiscoveryChannel ad, ILTWW, 0.8MB MP3]

Notice the circle of 5^ths movement in this series of chords. The ‘Circle of 5ths’ describes chord movement downward by 5^ths (or upward by 4^ths). The strong resolution of the dominant V⁷ chord to the tonic I chord is known, oddly enough, as ‘dominant resolution’.


In chamber musc and other classical music genres, ‘dominant resolution’ is called an ‘authentic cadence’. Every time we change chords:

• The root moves down a fifth, or one string.
  
• The seventh always slides down one fret, to become the third of the next chord.
  
• The third of the previous chord stays where it is, but becomes the seventh of the next chord.

    [50-sec clip, CrewsNelson, ILTM, 0.9MB MP3]

In the right hand of a guitar, each note moves to the pitchwise-closest note in the next chord. That’s basic ‘voice-leading’, and the ‘I-vi-ii-V⁷’ progression voice-leads well—it is physiologically convenient to sing and play, reliably and with minimal risk of mistakes, and, consequently, is likely to sound good—which is why this pattern has been so prevalent in western music over the centuries. MIDI sequencers can execute horribly complex patterns that might sound good, and MIDI sequencers can execute them with no performance risk. But our ears and minds have evolved over the millennia to prefer singability/playability. We love dire simplicity, as Jon Aldrich calls it.

Somehow ‘major scale’ = ‘happy expressivity’ / ‘minor scale’ = ‘melancholic expressivity’ became a social norm—at least in western music. That led to a bias toward the ‘harmonic minor’ harmonizations. Listen to just about any piece of music in a minor key and you will hear progressions like I-iv-V⁷-I / I-vi-ii-V⁷ / I-vi-IV-V⁷. Success breeds success. But the sound of the harmonic minor scale played in a melodic context was unpopular. So the Dorian and Aeloian came together with the addition of a raised 7^th (leading-tone), and this union begat the melodic minor scale. The raised 6^th and 7^th on the way up sounded ‘right’ in a melodic context and didn’t impair the harmonization.


    [50-sec clip, DSM, midi euphonium (Garitan), ILTM, 0.7MB MP3]

    [50-sec clip, Orange Sherbet, ILTM, 2.2MB MP3]

    [50-sec clip, Cedarmont Kids, ILTM, 2.1MB MP3]

As Frank Zappa put it in ‘The Real Frank Zappa Book’, this progression is the ultimate in formulaic ‘bad caucasian music’. While it may have originally been interesting 500 years ago or more, it has by now been so overused by every composer and songwriter that it’s become a musical cliché. ‘I-vi-ii-V’ progressions—the only way these can be used effectively to create new music is to subvert the cliché. Which you can see that Bach did in BWV 862 if you carefully analyze it, measure by measure.

In the end, Levitin’s new book is highly enjoyable, well worth the read. If you’re looking for penetrating comparative musicological scholarship, this is not your book; but, if you’ve read other of Levitin’s writings, you would never have thought that it would be anything other than what it is: an expansive, highly-readable, inspirational book-length essay. Successful record-producer and marketer that he is, Levitin concludes abruptly with a surprising ‘Love is the fulfillment of the Law’ passage that is patterned along the lines of Romans 13:8-10 or Galatians 5:14. What the!?

I  t is the love of our existence that is the highest love of all—the love of humanity with all our flaws; all our destructiveness; all our petty fears, gossip, and rivalries. A love of the goodness that we sometimes show under the most difficult stresses—of the heroism of doing the right thing even when no one can see us doing it; of being honest when there is nothing to gain by it; of loving those whom others might find unlovable. It is all this, and our capacity to write about it—to celebrate it in music—that makes us [sentient creatures with moral standing].”
  —  Daniel Levitin, The World in Six Songs, p. 289.

I won’t hazard to guess how comparative anthropologists will receive this book. But Levitin’s writing succeeds as brilliant, popularistic music commentary in much the same way as, say, Rob Kapilow or Bruce Adolphe succeeds. It’s fine. It’s fun. And it propels ordinary readers to think about why music works—about why they respond to it as they do.

Just the same, what about ILTM? Isn’t this song simultaneously a member of all six of Levitin’s categories? And why exactly is it that I like Brian Chapman’s Discovery Channel ad so, so much? The reason has nothing do with any of Levitin’s six categories. Boom-de-yada.

• Daniel Levitin page at McGill Psychology Dept, Lab for Music Perception, Cognition and Expertise.
  
• Eric Clarke page at Oxford
  
• Nicholas Cook page at Univ London Royal Holloway
  
• David Huron page at Ohio State Univ
  
• Bruno Nettl page at Univ Illinois Urbana-Champaign
  
• David Temperley page at Rochester Eastman School of Music
  
• Society for Music Perception and Cognition
  
• Center for Arts, Science + Technology, Stanford Univ, Annual Intl Symposium on Music and the Brain
  
• European Society for the Cognitive Sciences of Music (ESCOM)
  
• Centre for Research into Music Performance and Perception, Univ of Sheffield
  
• Psychology of Music Research Group, Royal Holloway, Univ London
  
• Deutsche Gesellschaft für Musikpsychologie
  
• MuPsych, Cambridge Univ
  
• Cognitive Musicology, Univ Jyvaskyla
  
• Jon Aldrich, Professor of Songwriting, Berklee College of Music
  
• Bortz F. Without music, could we call ourselves human? Cleveland Plain Dealer, 24-AUG-2008. [review of World in Six Songs]
  
• Itzkoff D. Anthromusicology: Review of The World in Six Songs. New York Times, 29-AUG-2008.
  
• Kenneally C. Review: The World in Six Songs. NewScientist 20-AUG-2008.
  
• David Byrne + Daniel Levitin, interview at SeedMagazine.com, 30-APR-2007.
  
• Munger D. Music and memory: How the songs we heard growing up shape the story of our lives. CognitiveDaily blog, 18-AUG-2008.
  
• Aubert L. The Music of The Other. Ashgate, 2007.
  
• Barz G, Cooley T. Shadows in the Field: New Perspectives for Fieldwork in Ethnomusicology. Oxford Univ, 2008.
  
• Clarke E, Cook N. Empirical Musicology. Oxford Univ, 2004.
  
• Eco U. A Theory of Semiotics. Indiana Univ, 1979, p. 16.
  
• Groocock J, Tomita Y. Fugal Composition: A Guide to the Study of Bach's '48'. Greenwood, 2003.
  
• Honing H. On the growing role of observation, formalization, and experimental method in musicology. Empirical Musicol Rev 2006; 1:1-5. [0.5MB pdf]
  
• Huron D. Sweet Anticipation: Music and the Psychology of Expectation. MIT, 2008.
  
• Levitin D. The World in Six Songs. Dutton, 2008. (see p. 108 for I-vi-ii-V progression)
  
• Nettl B, Bohlman P, eds. Comparative Musicology and Anthropology of Music. Univ Chicago, 1991.
  
• Peirce C. ‘Logic as semiotic: the theory of signs’, in Semiotics: An Introductory Anthology, Robert Innis, ed. Indiana Univ, 1985, p. 5.
  
• Post J. Ethnomusicology: A Contemporary Reader. Routledge, 2005.
  
• Stobart H. The New (Ethno)musicologies. Scarecrow, 2008.
  
• Stone R. Theory for Ethnomusicology. Prentice-Hall, 2007.
  
• Tarasti E. A Theory of Musical Semiotics. Indiana Univ, 1994.
  
• Temperley D. Music and Probability. MIT, 2007. [Bayesian modeling of expectation and surprise]
  
• Zappa F. The Real Frank Zappa Book. Fireside, 1990.

Always Already New: iMix Playlist Sharing

CMT: Did you know you can share your playlists with others by publishing them to the iTunes Store? Published playlists are called iMixes.

DSM: Yes. iMixes include 30-second previews of the tracks in your playlist that’re available from the iTunes Store. By definition, tracks by performers/composers that aren’t available in the iTunes Store can’t appear in iMixes. There aren’t a lot of classical or chamber music iMixes out there yet, but there are more than 400,000 iMixes that’ve been published to-date overall.

CMT: I know that iMixes have been around for a couple of years. But I hadn’t really bothered with them until the new features in iTunes V.7. Your comment about 6,000 string quartet tracks in the iTunes Store the other day made me think again about iMix. I spent some time playing with iTunes’ new iMix feature in iTunes V.7, which allows users to embed playlists in a blog, a MySpace or Facebook or LinkedIn page, or any other web site.

DSM: When you’ve created your iMix, find it in the iTunes Music Store and click the link for “Publish to the Web.” You then get frame containing HTML code that you can paste into your blog or web page. Anyone will be able to click on any of the tracks in order to hear a 30-second sample within their iTunes software. I’ve had occasional problems getting an embedded iMix to work in this Blogspot CSS, and Apple’s iMix/iTunes Store doesn’t currently allow direct streaming from the page. But overall it’s pretty cool.

CMT: Yes, this is a viral marketing play by Apple, to pull users into the iTunes Store. But it’s not much different from the “share this song/playlist” features in Napster, Rhapsody, and other music services. So if you were imagining getting some valuable widget for free and being spared the commercial promotion, fuggettaboudit. An alternative of course is just to point your friends to your last.fm profile. That takes absolutely no effort and is commercial-free, but it’s got the disadvantage that last.fm doesn’t yet have an adequate catalog of classical music available. And it shares your entire last.fm profile, which you typically wouldn’t want to do, with all the non-chamber music things it’s probably got in it. And your last.fm profile is evolving over time, so the profile you share today won’t be what your friend who opens it next week or next month gets. It’s not a ‘publishing’ model at all. So I really prefer publishing and sharing a defined iMix playlist.

DSM: If you don’t like iTunes Store or don’t want to have Apple embedded iMix playlists force-launch iTunes, you might try HotListMaker . HotList enables playing 30-second MP3 clips, but, like iTunes, it too is commercial, steering the listener to digital music site Puretracks to buy the tracks. HotListMaker is currently in alpha, and it shows.

CMT: To publish your iMix:

• Select the playlist you’ve created on your PC that you want to publish as an iMix and choose File > Create an iMix.
  
• Enter the descriptive information about your playlist and click Publish (upload to the iTunes Store site).
  
• (Changes you make to a published iMix aren’t updated updated automatically on the iTunes Store, so if you want to change your iMix you need to republish it after you make your updates.)

If you add or remove tracks from a playlist that you’ve published as an iMix in the iTunes Store, you need to update the iMix before others can see your new list. You can also edit the description or title of an iMix, or remove an iMix from the iTunes Store.

DSM: And here’s how to change an iMix that you’ve previously published:

• To see a list of the playlists you’ve published or to remove an iMix from the iTunes Store, sign in to the iTunes Store and click View Account.
  
• Select the playlist, click the arrow to the right of the playlist, and then click Update iMix. Make your changes and click Publish.
  
• To see your iMix as it appears at the iTunes Store, click the arrow to the right of the playlist.

CMT: One main aim of playlist-sharing is for the sharee to discover new music that the sharee might not otherwise have encountered. Besides the playlist-sharing iMix stuff, there’s also the aspect of music-discovery. When looking at the iTunes website, I see that you can create a custom RSS feed to keep you apprised of new releases in your preferred genre(s). When I created one and plugged the URL into my RSS feed reader and it gives me a nice list of entries.

DSM: Well, the ‘surface’ aim isn’t the end of the matter. Publishing playlists is a cryptic way to communicate your identity, too. One of the more illuminating parts of Howard Rheingold’s book, Smart Mobs, is its discussion of the ways that technologies are being coopted by people to craft their social identities. Some readers might construe the lists of items we put at the bottom of each post in this blog that way. Of course, publishing playlists is a two-way street. The sharer can be critiqued by the sharees, or he/she can be ignored. Epinions, eBay buyer and seller feedback, and Slashdot contributor ratings—and now iMix ratings—are a few examples of how we’re now able to create public identities and social capital online. But that social capital and those identities are weighed in the balance of public opinion—they can appreciate in value, or they can go down in value.

CMT: So you’re anxious about people creating and publishing iMixes merely as ‘ornaments’ for their false, wanna-be persona? Poseurs? Social fraudsters?

DSM: No, not concerned—just an incidental thought that occurred to me. I’m more concerned about what intellectual property rights attach to these things called playlists when they’re published.

CMT: And I’m wondering how the lists will be curated so that the response-time of searching to discover iMixes that match my search criteria doesn’t deteriorate over the next few years. I wonder whether Apple iTunes Store will enable ‘best-if-used-by’ expiration dates, or maybe implement some sort of most-frequently-referenced ranking or generation-based garbage-collection regime or some other way of purging old or unpopular or orphaned iMix playlists. More than that, I wish they’d add a feature that would let me specify my own effectivity ‘start’ and ‘end’ dates. I’d like to be able to put an iMix up in a sequestered pre-press ‘staging’ area, pending my having my email or blog post or other collateral materials ready. As it is, it’s instantly in the public ‘available’ status as soon as I share it. So Apple really isn’t supporting any kind of ‘publishing’ model for us. I imagine that that doesn’t matter to all of the kids sharing playlists with each other. But for a not-for-profit organization or for a university or any type of serious entity that wants to use iMixes as part of their marketing and communication with their constituencies, it’s problematic.

DSM: I’m sure Apple’s got some VLDB (very large database) engineers working on that. Of course, all that’s needed is for Google to buy them…

• Barabasi A. Linked: How Everything Is Connected to Everything Else and What It Means. Plume, 2003.
  
• Benkler Y. The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. Yale Univ, 2006.
  
• Buchanan M. Nexus: Small Worlds and the Groundbreaking Theory of Networks. Norton, 2003.
  
• Fuller M. Media Ecologies: Materialist Energies in Art and Technoculture. MIT, 2005.
  
• Gilmor D. We the Media: Grassroots Journalism by the People, for the People. O'Reilly, 2006.
  
• Gitelman L. Always Already New: Media, History, and the Data of Culture. MIT, 2006.
  
• Grandin T, Barron S. The Unwritten Rules of Social Relationships. Saunders, 2004.
  
• Harris C, Alexander A, eds. Theorizing Fandom: Fans, Subculture and Identity. Hampton, 1998.
  
• Hellekson K, Busse K, eds. Fan Fiction and Fan Communities in the Age of the Internet. McFarland, 2006.
  
• Humphries L, Messaris P, eds. Digital Media: Transformations in Human Communication. Lang, 2006.
  
• Jenkins H. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. NYU, 2006.
  
• Jenkins H. Fans, Bloggers, and Gamers: Media Consumers in a Digital Age. NYU, 2006.
  
• Johnson S. Emergence: The Connected Lives of Ants, Brains, Cities, and Software. Scribner, 2002.
  
• Lessig L. The Future of Ideas: The Fate of the Commons in a Connected World. Vintage, 2002.
  
• Lessig L. Free Culture: The Nature and Future of Creativity. Penguin, 2005.
  
• Lewis L. The Adoring Audience. Routledge, 1992.
  
• Morville P. Ambient Findability. O'Reilly, 2005.
  
• Munster A. Materializing New Media: Embodiment in Information Aesthetics. Dartmouth, 2006.
  
• O'Gorman M. E-Crit: Digital Media, Critical Theory, and the Humanities. Univ Toronto, 2006.
  
• Rheingold H. Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution. Basic, 2003.
  
• White M. The Body and the Screen: Theories of Internet Spectatorship. MIT, 2006.
  
• Zielinski S, Druckrey T. Deep Time of the Media: Toward an Archaeology of Hearing and Seeing by Technical Means. MIT, 2005.
  
• Anderson R, Cissna K. Criticism and conversational texts: rhetorical bases of role, audience, and style in the Buber-Rogers dialogue. Journal of Human Studies. 1996; 19(1):85-118.
  
• Killick A. Holicipation: Prolegomenon to an Ethnography of Solitary Music-Making. Ethnomusicology Forum. 2006; 15(2): 273-99.
  
• HotListMaker.com