This article was downloaded by: [University of Exeter]

On: 10 August 2015, At: 23:20

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place,
London, SW1P 1WG

Journal of New Music Research

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/nnmr20

Quantitative Analysis of Phrasing Strategies in

Expressive Performance: Computational Methods and
Analysis of Performances of Unaccompanied Bach for
Solo Violin
a a b
Eric Cheng & Elaine Chew
a
University of Southern California Viterbi School of Engineering , Los Angeles, California,
USA
b
Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, Harvard University , Cambridge, Massachusetts,
USA
Published online: 23 Jun 2009.

To cite this article: Eric Cheng & Elaine Chew (2008) Quantitative Analysis of Phrasing Strategies in Expressive Performance:
Computational Methods and Analysis of Performances of Unaccompanied Bach for Solo Violin, Journal of New Music Research,
37:4, 325-338, DOI: 10.1080/09298210802711660

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09298210802711660

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Journal of New Music Research
2008, Vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 325–338
Quantitative Analysis of Phrasing Strategies in Expressive
Performance: Computational Methods and Analysis of
Performances of Unaccompanied Bach for Solo Violin
Eric Cheng1 and Elaine Chew1,2
1
University of Southern California Viterbi School of Engineering, Los Angeles, California, USA; 2Radcliffe Institute for
Advanced Study, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:20 10 August 2015
Abstract
This paper presents computational methods for quan-
titative description and analysis of expressive performance
strategies in violin performances. We present
general techniques for extracting beat-level tempo and
loudness data, and the Local Maximum Phrase Detection
(LMPD) method. The LMPD method equates local
maxima in the loudness curve with interpreted phrases,
and defines measures of phrase strength (clarity), phrase
volatility (standard deviation), and phrase typicality
(concurrence with norm), for characterizing each phrase.
The methods are developed in the context of, and applied
to, eleven recorded performances of the Andante move-
ment from Bach’s Sonata No. 2 in A minor BWV 1003 for
solo violin by master violinists. For each performance, we
present tempo and loudness summary statistics of the
entire piece, its sections, and each phrase. In our
experiments, we find that loudness is a more consistent
indicator of phrasing strategies, suggesting that phrase
structure may impose stricter constraints on dynamic than
on tempo variation. The results of the LMPD method
show that Kremer’s performance exhibits the highest, and
Enescu’s the lowest, phrase volatility; Milstein’s shows the
highest average phrase typicality, and Enescu’s the lowest;
and, Grumiaux plays with the highest, and Menuhin the
lowest, average phrase strength.
1. Introduction
No two performances of a piece of music are exactly
alike. The survival of classical music performance relies
Correspondence: Eric Cheng, 1394 Midvale Ave. #202, Los Angeles, CA 90024, USA. E-mail: echeng@post.harvard.edu
DOI: 10.1080/09298210802711660 Ó 2008 Taylor & Francis
on the fact that a single composition can be performed,
time and again, in a multitude of ways, yet remain fresh
and captivating over hundreds of years. How is it that a
single composition, represented in one score, can yield
seemingly infinite possibilities when brought to life in the
realm of sound? A large part of what makes this possible
is the ability of musicians to form unique interpretations
of a piece in contrast to other ones, and to communicate
these interpretations through musical prosody – the
strategic variation of timing (tempo variances, agogic
accents), dynamics (amplitude and loudness), articula-
tion (note length), and timbre.
Musical prosody is essential – indeed, Palmer and
Hutchins (2006) call it ‘‘obligatory’’ – to effective
performance. In any written score, the composer
indicates some, but not all, of the structural and
expressive information. The incompleteness of describing
music using a score, or almost any extra-musical means,
gives a musician significant control over the information
communicated, and the method and effectiveness of the
communication.
By varying the musical parameters of time, amplitude,
articulation, and timbre, musicians are able to emphasize
structural groupings, such as the end of a section or the
beginning of a new one, and express a variety of
emotions. These communicative functions of musical
prosody are perhaps best illustrated by film soundtracks,
where the performed music serves to clarify and enhance
the structure and mood of the visual material.
In this paper, we are concerned with the questions: do
musicians have unlimited freedom to imprint their
expressive visions on the pieces they perform? Or, does
 326 Eric Cheng and Elaine Chew
the musical structure limit the possibilities? How do
musicians vary the musical parameters in order to
generate expression? Can we describe the available
choices for expressive freedom? Can we systematically
compare different interpretative strategies?
Our goal is to design generalizable ways to formulate
quantitative and musically meaningful answers to questions
such as these through computational analysis of tempo and
dynamics. To this end, we describe our end-to-end analysis
process, beginning with audio recordings and tempo and
dynamics determination, through automatic extraction of
phrases and quantitative descriptions of phrasing strategies,
to comparisons of music interpretations as conveyed by the
phrasings in expert violin performances.
1.1 Paper organization
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:20 10 August 2015
The paper is organized as follows: we begin by presenting
methodologies for extracting beat-level tempo and
dynamic data from audio recordings, an essential first
step before these expressive parameters can be analysed
and interpreted. Tempo is computed from manually
extracted beat onsets, while dynamics are obtained using
the PEAQ (Kabal, 2002) psychoacoustic loudness model
and a perceptually optimized smoothing algorithm.
The tempo and loudness extraction techniques are
introduced in the context of analysing eleven perfor-
mances of the Andante (third) movement from Bach’s
Sonata No. 2 in A minor BWV 1003 for solo violin by
master violinists, ranging from Ehnes to Szigeti. We
calculate tempo and dynamic means and ranges over
musical segments of varying lengths to identify trends in
expressive strategies. We then inspect the tempo and
loudness data, and infer that, at least for the violin
performances we are studying, loudness is a more
consistent indicator of phrasing strategy.
Next, we present the Local Maximum Phrase Detec-
tion (LMPD) method, briefly introduced and demon-
strated in Cheng and Chew (2007). The LMPD is
designed to describe higher level phrasing strategies.
The LMPD finds phrases by locating the local maxima in
the loudness curve; it then ascribes quantities of phrase
strength (average increase/decrease in loudness), phrase
volatility (standard deviation of phrase strengths in a
performance), and phrase typicality (concurrence with
other performances) to each phrase. These are musically
motivated quantities to describe the degree of dynamic
change used to indicate a phrase, the range of such
variations employed, and the commonness of a particular
phrase segmentation strategy.
The final part of the article presents detailed results
and analyses of the application of the LMPD method to
the eleven performances of Bach’s Violin Sonata No. 2.
Through these results, we examine the relationship
between prosody and musical phrase structure, present-
ing some conclusions and discussions.
Next, we describe work related to each method in their
order of appearance in this article.
1.2 Related work in beat and tempo extraction
Past research in the analysis of expressive strategies has
tended to focus on the piano, where the advent of
computer-monitored recording devices and the percus-
sive nature of the instrument facilitate the extraction of
beat-level tempo data. For example, Langner and Goebl
(2003), Sundberg (2003), and Todd (1992, 1995) all used
data from computer-monitored acoustic piano perfor-
mances. A similar computer-monitored system for
acoustic violin has yet to be developed that could
facilitate the accurate detection of beat onsets.
Detecting beat is a first step toward determining the
tempo. The typical beat tracking system is designed for
music with a strong and regular beat, such as dance
music, or music with percussion instruments. Few beat
extraction algorithms are equipped to deal with expres-
sive timing variations. Automatic beat tracking algo-
rithms designed for expressive performances, such as
those developed by Dixon (2000, 2001), still require
human intervention to consistently find the beats.
Violin performances pose special challenges for beat
extraction because, as bowed instruments, violins can
produce soft, indeterminate onsets. Researchers have
proposed general and automatic onset detection methods
based on a number of acoustic features (Bello et al.,
2004). Collins (2005) showed that these algorithms’
performances are markedly worse for the kinds of non-
percussive soft onsets exhibited by violin sounds.
The ground truth for the evaluation of onset detection
algorithms is typically created by manual annotation.
Because our aim is expression analysis, for which having
reliable and accurate tempo information is key, we
chose to follow a method similar to that employed by
Repp (1998, 1999a,b): manual onset detection using a
digital waveform editor. We use Apple’s Final Cut Pro1
to mark the beats. Similar annotation tools exist in other
applications such as the Sonic Visualiser.2
1.3 Related work on extraction of dynamics
Dynamics extraction poses difficulties due to the com-
plexity of loudness perception, which depends on more
than the sound pressure levels encoded in a typical audio
waveform.
Repp (1999a) used waveform amplitude as a mea-
sure of loudness when analysing expressive dynamics in
commercial piano recordings. He computed the root-
mean-square amplitude envelope of each digitized
1
Apple’s Final Cut Pro – www.apple.com/finalcutpro
2
Sonic Visualiser – www.sonicvisualiser.org.
 Quantitative analysis of phrasing strategies in expressive performance
waveform and applied an automatic peak-picking algo-
rithm to identify the peak amplitude following each note
onset. Peak amplitudes were converted into peak sound
levels in decibels (dB) and interpreted as approximate,
but sufficient, measures of perceived loudness.
In order to accurately quantify perceived loudness, we
consider psychoacoustic loudness models that account
for the temporal and spectral contexts in which sounds
are heard. We choose two existing loudness models, a
single-band equivalent sound level with revised low-
frequency B-weighting, Leq(RLB), model (see Soulodre
& Norcross, 2003), and a MATLAB implementation of
the multi-band PEAQ loudness model as described by
Kabal (2002). We apply Gaussian smoothing to the
output of the two models; Langner and Goebl (2003)
implement a similar smoothing function in their tempo-
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:20 10 August 2015
loudness visualization application. We then system-
atically evaluate the loudness waveforms produced by
the two models for a range of smoothing window sizes,
and compare the results with human (an expert
musician’s) annotation of a test piece.
Our evaluation is a step towards listener-centred
evaluation of loudness models in the context of
continuously sounding music. Other researchers have
carried out evaluations of loudness models. For example,
Soulodre and Norcross (2003) evaluated seven equivalent
sound level (Leq) loudness models against subjective
reference data, and found the Leq(RLB) model to
perform better than other Leq models. Skovenberg and
Nielsen (2004) confirmed Soulodre and Norcross’ results,
although they find that two new models they propose at
TC Electronics perform even better than the Leq(RLB).
These evaluations are based on monophonic segments of
music or speech for matching loudness. We have based
our evaluation on reference measurements reported
continuously over a performance of the entire Andante
movement from Bach’s Violin Sonata No. 2, so as to
better simulate natural human listening behaviour.
1.4 Related research on interpretation strategies
A wealth of research has been conducted on expressive
music performance – see, for example, the reviews by
Gabrielsson (1999, 2003) and by Widmer and Goebl
(2004). Research on expressive strategies includes micro
and macro analyses of timing/tempo and dynamics
information; very few have focused on phrasing strategy,
much less the examination of musical interpretation. Our
study relates local timing and dynamics information to
interpretation with respect to phrasing strategies.
We find tempo and dynamic strategies to be vastly
different for the recordings we examine, and choose to
focus on dynamics information for the extraction of
phrase information. Repp (1998, 1999a) used principal
components analysis to identify independent timing and
dynamics strategies in a group of performances, and
327
concluded that timing and dynamics were independently
controlled within phrases. In contrast, Todd (1992) used
a cresendo/decrescendo-accelerando/ritardando relation-
ship between dynamics and timing as the basis of a model
for musical expression.
In order to study phrasing strategy, we first need
methods for accurately recognizing, localizing, and label-
ling phrases. Research in automatic extraction of phrases
from expressive performances is still fairly new. In Cheng
and Chew (2007), we presented the Local Maximum Phrase
Detection (LMPD) algorithm that uses local maxima in the
loudness curve to locate phrases. Chuan and Chew (2007)
proposed a dynamic programming algorithm for extracting
phrases by finding the sequence of quadratic or spline curves
that best fits the tempo time series.
Prior research on expressive phrasing strategies has
most frequently been local in nature. That is, studies have
discussed how performers vary musical parameters within
a single phrase or near a single phrase boundary (see, e.g.
Gabrielsson, 1987; Cambouropoulos, 2001; Langner &
Goebl, 2003). While certain local phrasing strategies – such
as clarifying phrase boundaries with declines in tempo and
dynamics – are well documented, relatively little is known
about higher level phrasing strategies. Such strategies,
such as how performers choose to segment a piece into
phrases, and how their particular strategies relate to
others’ are the subject of our study.
Other work on phrasing strategy has focused on syn-
thesis rather than analysis. Analysis-by-synthesis was
used by Sundberg et al. (2003) to test the validity of
hypothesized rule-based models of expressive timing and
dynamics. In the Expression Synthesis Project (Chew
et al., 2005), which uses a driving (wheel and pedals)
interface to generate expressive performances, Chew
et al. (2006) used roadmaps that correspond to alternate
phrasing strategies to generate performances with
different musical interpretations.
We apply our quantitative phrase strategy analysis
techniques to performances of Bach’s Violin Sonata No. 2
to provide musically meaningful information about the
interpretations. A few other researchers have focused on the
analysis of entire pieces. For example, Sapp (2007) intro-
duced the use of scape plots to present correlation values of
segments of tempo/loudness data of varying lengths, ap-
plying the technique to performances of Chopin’s
Mazurkas. Dixon et al., (2002) presented an interface for
visualizing expressive information over time as a continuous
trajectory on a two-dimensional tempo-loudness space.
Hong (2003) analysed passages from Bach’s Cello Suite in C
major BWV 1009 to test the validity of the aforementioned
timing/dynamics relationship proposed by Todd (1992).
2. Data extraction
We choose as our data set eleven commercially available
recordings of the Andante (third) movement from Bach’s
 328 Eric Cheng and Elaine Chew
Sonata No. 2 in A minor BWV 1003 for solo violin. We
select this piece for its regular pulse and unambiguous
phrase structure – qualities that simplify both data
extraction and analysis. Additionally, there are no
dynamic markings in the score, leaving greater room
for individual expression. The score for the piece is
shown in Figure 1. The phrases shown in the score are
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:20 10 August 2015
Fig. 1. Score with phrase annotations.
manually added for the analysis of section 3, and are not
part of the original manuscript.
The performances in the eleven recordings were by
Ehnes, Enescu, Grumiaux, Heifetz, Kremer, Menuhin,
Milstein (1956, 1975), Mintz, Szeryng, and Szigeti. Table 1
lists the sources of the recordings we used in this study.
Following the convention established by Repp (1998,
 Quantitative analysis of phrasing strategies in expressive performance 329

Table 1. Recordings of Bach’s Violin Sonata No. 2.

Performer Year Recorded/Released Label (Catalog #) UPC

1 Ehnes 2000/2000 Analekta (231478) 774204314729

2 Enescu 1949/2002 Classica D’oro (2014) 723724387225
3 Grumiaux 1961/1994 Philips (438736) 028943873628
4 Heifetz 1952/1995 RCA (61748) 090266174829
5 Kremer 2002/2005 ECM New Series (000506502) 028947672913
6 Menuhin 1936/2000 EMI Classics Références (67197) 724356719729
7 Milstein 1956/2001 EMI Classics (66869) 724356686922
8 Milstein 1975/1998 DG The Originals (457701) 028945770123
9 Mintz 1984/1995 DG Masters (445526) 028944552621
10 Szeryng 1967/1997 DG Double (453004) 028945300429
11 Szigeti 1955–1956/2003 Vanguard (1246) 699675124625
12 Grand Average
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:20 10 August 2015

1999a), we created a twelfth ‘‘performer’’, the grand average

profile, which was the average of all eleven performances for
analysis purposes. The following sub-sections present the
methodologies employed to extract tempo and dynamics
data in the context of these performances.

2.1 Tempo
To extract beat onset times, we use the digital waveform
editor in Apple’s Final Cut Pro video editing software.
Final Cut Pro has a built-in marking tool allowing onsets
to be marked while tapping along to the recording.
Onsets are marked every eighth note. These onsets are
then exported into MATLAB where tempo values for
each onset are calculated as the inverse of the inter-onset
interval, and smoothed using a rectangular (a moving
average) smoothing window. An example tempo plot,
one for Ehnes’ performance, is shown in Figure 2.
2.2 Dynamics
This section describes our process for selecting a loudness
model for extracting the dynamics of an expressive
performance. The methodology presented here serves as
an example of how loudness models could be evaluated
and compared for the purpose of analysing expressive
performances.
We compare a single-band Leq(RLB) model and a
MATLAB implementation of the multi-band PEAQ
loudness model by Kabal (2002). For both the Leq(RLB)
and PEAQ models, the original waveform is processed to
obtain a loudness waveform. We sampled this waveform
at the onset times and smoothed the result using a
Gaussian window.
To test the models, we compare the loudness values
obtained for a single recording (Milstein, 1956) against a
manually plotted reference curve, created independently
by one of the authors (Cheng, an expert violinist)
Fig. 2. Tempo plot after manual onset detection and
smoothing.
continuously annotating the perceived loudness of each
eighth note while listening to the recording. Loudness
values are generated for the entire Andante movement of
Bach’s Violin Sonata No. 2.
We apply Gaussian smoothing to the output of each
loudness model. To evaluate the performance of the
loudness models, we compute the correlation coefficient
between the reference curve and the smoothed loudness
curve produced by each model. After optimizing the
smoothing window parameters to maximize the correla-
tion coefficient for each model, we then select the model
with the highest maximum correlation coefficient.
The PEAQ model yields the highest correlation value.
The maximum correlation for the PEAQ model is
rPEAQ ¼ 0.854, versus the corresponding value for the
Leq(RLB) model, rLeq(RLB) ¼ 0.839. The optimal half-
width of the Gaussian smoothing window for the PEAQ
 330 Eric Cheng and Elaine Chew
model is 2.3 eighth notes. The optimized model output is
shown with the reference curve in Figure 3.
Other comparisons are conducted, leading to similar
results, using a rectangular smoothing window, and
using a scaled mean square error (SMSE) measure. The
presentation and discussion of these results are outside
the scope of the present article; they are outlined in
Cheng (2006).
3. Data analysis: summary statistics
We first present summary tempo and dynamic statistics
for the entire piece, for each section in the piece, and for
each manually prescribed phrase. Consider the score for
the Andante movement of Bach’s Violin Sonata No. 2 as
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:20 10 August 2015
presented in Figure 1. Observe that the piece consists of
two repeated sections, yielding four sections, A, A0 , B,
and B0 , in total. The phrase boundaries, marked in the
score, are determined by examining the score indepen-
dently of the recordings and later confirmed as reason-
able by an expert violinist.3 Sections 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3
present the tempo and dynamic means and ranges
for the entire piece, each section, and each phrase,
respectively.
3.1 Global means and ranges
Figures 4(a) and (b) show the tempo and dynamic means
and ranges for each performer, over the entire piece. The
performers are indicated by numbers; their names are
listed in Table 1. Each circle in the middle of the bar
Fig. 3. Correlation-optimal PEAQ model curve.
3 more widely followed by all performers, with the
Daphne Wang, violin DMA student at the USC Thornton
School of Music.
indicates the performer’s mean tempo or dynamic value,
and the bars span the individual’s tempo or dynamic
range. The range is computed as the mean + 2 standard
deviations, which gives approximately the 95% con-
fidence interval.
Two interesting points can be made about the two
plots in Figure 4. First, note that the lower extremes of
the dynamic ranges reach comparably closer to zero than
those of the tempo ranges. In other words, a tempo of
zero is several more standard deviations away from the
tempo means than a loudness value of zero is from the
dynamic means. This makes sense, since a zero-valued
tempo corresponds to an infinitely long inter-onset
interval; a tempo of zero signifies stasis, an infinite wait,
which is musically uninteresting and precludes further
continuation. While this observation may seem trivial,
it does highlight a fundamental difference between
tempo and dynamics: while a performer may employ a
zero-valued dynamic, a zero-valued tempo may only
ever be approached asymptotically. This difference no
doubt has a basis in the way we perceive the two
parameters: tempo perception requires a comparison of
temporally spaced events, while loudness may be
perceived nearly instantaneously, and without a preced-
ing or following event.
Second, there appear to be more significant differences
in the global tempo strategies in Figure 4(a) than in the
dynamic strategies in Figure 4(b). For example, the mean
tempo for Performer 8 (Milstein, 1975) lies completely
outside the tempo range of all but two other recordings,
whereas the dynamic means of all the recordings lie well
within all the dynamic ranges.
The musical significance of these observations is
further discussed in section 6.
3.2 Section means and ranges
The individual means and ranges, calculated over each of
the four sections, are shown in Figures 5(a) through (d).
For a given performer, the four bars, from left to right,
represent values calculated over sections A, A0 , B, and B0 ,
respectively. In cases where a performer acknowledged
only one repeat, the absent sections have been omitted.
By examining the grand average profile, we can begin
to identify potential trends in section-to-section varia-
tions. In Figure 5(a), the grand average profile suggests
that performers, on average, perform the repeat occur-
rence of a section at a quieter mean dynamic than the
first occurrence. This appears to be a weak trend,
however. Ehnes, Heifetz, Szeryng, and Szigeti all violate
it to varying degrees.
In Figure 5(b), each successive section tends to be
played at a slower mean tempo, as if there is a section-
level ritard over the course of the piece. This trend is
exception of Kremer, Mintz, and Szeryng.
 Quantitative analysis of phrasing strategies in expressive performance
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:20 10 August 2015
Fig. 4. (a) Global tempo means and ranges. (b) Global dynamic means and ranges.
In Figure 5(c), the second occurrence of a section
tends to be played with a wider dynamic range than the
first. This appears to be a strong trend, violated only by
Menuhin and Szigeti.
In Figure 5(d), the tempo range tends to grow wider
with each successive section, with the final section
exhibiting the widest tempo range. On average, the
tempo range of the final section is 89.1% greater than
the average tempo range for the previous three sections.
The greatest tempo range occurs in the final section for
every performer. As we shall see in the next section, the
rise in tempo range in the final section is largely
attributable to the final-phrase ritard.
3.3 Phrase means and ranges
Shown in Figures 6(a) through (d) are the individual
means and ranges calculated over each phrase (as
indicated on the score in Figure 1). Each curve represents
the phrase-by-phrase data from one performance.
Vertical lines divide the plots into the four sections: A,
A0 , B, and B0 .
A striking visual feature occurs in the tempo range
plot shown in Figure 6(d), where there is a pronounced
spike in the tempo range in the final phrases of the B and
B0 sections. Figure 6(b) shows that these spikes in the
tempo range correspond to drops in mean tempo in
these final phrases. Indeed, there appears to be a
consistent trend towards playing the final phrase of a
section with a slower mean tempo, a section-level version
of the much-cited phrase-ending ritard (see Cambour-
opoulos, 2001; Langner & Goebl, 2003; Sundberg et al.,
2003). In Figures 6(b) and (d), we also see that the
previously mentioned spike in the tempo range in
331
sections B and B0 is largely a function of the final-
phrase ritard.
Similarly striking is the contrast between tempo and
dynamic means in plots 6(a) and (b). While the dynamic
means are tightly packed and highly similar in shape, the
tempo means show wide variations. While it is possible
that artifacts of the recording process constrain the
dynamic strategies to be within similar ranges, similarity
in phrase-to-phrase shapings are preserved through these
manipulations, and can only be explained by similarities
in expressive strategy.
When examining the dynamic mean and range plots in
Figures 6(a) and (c), we also begin to visually identify
regions of greater and lesser agreement among perfor-
mers. Figure 6(a) shows that the performers follow
similar dynamic strategies in the A and A0 sections, while
they appear to diverge significantly in the B and B0
sections. This concurrence is apparent in the dynamic
ranges as well. It is surprising how similar the first-half
dynamic strategies are, given that there are no dynamic
markings in the score.
One way to make sense of these regions of narrow
diversity is to interpret the degree of performer agreement
as indicative of the constraint placed on performers by the
musical structure. Under this interpretation, the plots
suggest that the musical structure is more clearly defined in
the first half of the piece, forcing performers to follow
similar dynamic strategies. Conversely, the diversity of
second-half strategies suggests the musical structure is less
well defined, leaving room for performers to employ a
wider variety of strategies. Alternatively, stylistic conven-
tion could grant performers varying degrees of interpretive
freedom throughout the piece though the musical structure
may be equally well defined.
 332 Eric Cheng and Elaine Chew
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:20 10 August 2015

Fig. 5. Section-level statistics. (a) Dynamic means. (b) Tempo means. (c) Dynamic ranges. (d) Tempo ranges.

4. The local maximum phrase detection
method
Our strategy for global phrasing analysis is to mathe-
matically identify phrases within a performance and
compare the number and locations of phrases across
performances. In a previous paper, we introduced a
Local Maximum Phrase Detection (LMPD) method for
analysing global phrasing strategies (see Cheng & Chew,
2007). Here, we present the technique, and provide
further motivation for the method, before delving into
the analysis results when it is applied to the eleven
performances of the Andante movement from Bach’s
Violin Sonata No. 2.
4.1 The case for loudness
To devise a systematic phrase detection method, we
superimposed the author-annotated phrase boundaries
over beat-level tempo and dynamic plots, as shown for
the section A in Figures 7(a) and (b). Vertical lines
denote phrase beginnings, and each trajectory represents
performance data for one recording.
Observe that the loudness trajectories appear to be
more consistently related to the annotated phrase
boundaries than their tempo counterparts. In particular,
phrases are well characterized by a crescendo/decrescen-
do arch similar to that mentioned in several past studies,
such as Gabrielsson (1987), Sundberg et al. (2003), and
 Quantitative analysis of phrasing strategies in expressive performance 333
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:20 10 August 2015

Fig. 6. Phrase-level statistics. (a) Dynamic means. (b) Tempo means. (c) Dynamic ranges. (d) Tempo ranges.

Todd (1992). In some cases, phrases are characterized by

two or more sub-arches, suggesting that those performers
chose to further divide the annotated phrases into sub-
phrases in those particular recordings.
In contrast, tempo strategies are less systematically
related to the annotated phrase boundaries, with a
greater diversity of trajectories. These observations,
confirmed by higher average inter-performer correlations
for loudness than for tempo ( rtempo ¼ 0.4862 versus
rloudness ¼ 0.7627), lead us to conclude that loudness is a
more reliable parameter for phrase detection, in parti-
cular, that a crescendo/decrescendo arch is a reliable
indicator for the occurrence of a phrase.
4.2 Local maximum phrase detection
If we assume that each phrase can be characterized by a
crescendo/decrescendo arch, then each phrase should
also contain a local maximum in loudness. Here we
define a local maximum as any loudness value for which
the two surrounding values (before and after) are
smaller. The LMPD method uses this local maximum
as a mathematical indicator for the existence of a phrase.
The method consists of two steps: (1) record the number
and locations of local loudness maxima for each
performance; and, (2) interpret each local maximum as
a phrase or sub-phrase. This method allows us to define
 334 Eric Cheng and Elaine Chew
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:20 10 August 2015

Fig. 7. Note-level trajectories for section A: (a) tempo, (b) dynamics.

Fig. 8. Phrase strength parameters.
additional mathematical descriptors, described in the
following sub-sections, to quantify the characteristics of
phrasing strategy.
4.2.1 Phrase strength
We define the phrase strength, Sj, of a phrase to be equal
to the average loudness difference between its local
maximum and the two adjacent local minima:
1 The phrase volatility, V, is defined to be the standard
Sj ¼ ½ðMj  mj Þ þ ðMj  mjþ1 Þ;
2 deviation of all Sj values in the performance. The phrase
where Mj is the loudness value of the local maximum and
mj and mjþ1 are the loudness values of the two adjoining
Fig. 9. Phrase typicality parameters for section A. Top:
loudness profile of the grand average performance. Bottom:
local maxima counts for each eighth note, Pk.
local minima as shown in Figure 8. The phrase strength
value quantifies the degree to which the peak loudness in
a phrase stands out from its neighbouring loudness dips,
the softer beginning and end of the phrase or sub-phrase.
These values allow us to measure the prominence, and in
a sense, the clarity of a phrase.
4.2.2 Phrase volatility
volatility value measures the degree and quantity
of variance from the average phrase strength. A
performance exhibiting a large variability of phrase
 Quantitative analysis of phrasing strategies in expressive performance
strengths would have a high V, while a performance
exhibiting relatively constant phrase strength would have
a low V.
4.2.3 Phrase typicality
The phrase typicality, Tk, of a phrase with a local
maximum at location k quantifies the popularity of that
location as a phrase peak. It is defined to be the proportion
of other performers who also place a local maximum at
the location k. Mathematically, the phrase typicality for a
phrase with a local maximum at position k is given by:
Pk  1
Tk ¼ ;
N1
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:20 10 August 2015
where Pk is the total number of performers placing a
local maximum at location k, and N is the total number
Fig. 10. LMPD Results. (a) Local maxima counts. (b) Average phrase strength. (c) Phrase volatility. (d) Average phrase typicality. (e)
Legend.
335
of performers. The greater the number of performers
placing a local maximum at a particular location, the
greater the typicality of a phrase with a maximum at that
location. Figure 9 shows how Pk varies with location in
section A. The vertical dotted lines indicate local
maxima.
For a given performance, if the local maxima occur at
{k1, k2, . . . , kn}, then the average phrase typicality for
the performance is given by the expression:
1X kn
T ¼ Tk :
n k¼k1
High average typicality would point to high concurrence
with other performers in the choice of phrase peak
positions in the score. Low average typicality would
point to overall low agreement with other performers in
phrasing choice. The average phrase typicality can thus
 336 Eric Cheng and Elaine Chew
be interpreted as some measure of the uniqueness of a
performer’s phrasing strategy.
5. Data analysis: LMPD results
This section describes the analysis results when the
LMPD method is applied to the eleven performances
(plus the grand average performance) of the Andante
movement from Bach’s Violin Sonata No. 2. The num-
bers of local maxima per performance, referred to as
local maxima counts, are shown in Figure 10(a). The local
maxima counts range from 45 (Mintz) to 53 (Heifetz).
The eleven performances produced only six distinct local
maxima counts, suggesting there may be a finite number
of musically acceptable phrasing strategies.
The average phrase strength values are shown in
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:20 10 August 2015
Figure 10(b). Grumiaux played with the highest average
phrase strength while Menuhin played with the lowest.
Informal listening tests support these results. It would be
interesting to conduct formal listening tests to determine
whether phrase strength values correlate well with human
perception of phrasing clarity.
Figure 10(c) shows the phrase volatility values. Kremer
stands out as the performer with by far the greatest phrase
volatility. Indeed, when listening to his recording, phrase
volatility proved to be the defining feature of his
performance. This result highlights a need to better under-
stand the perceptual relevance of our mathematical
descriptors; it is conceivable that phrase strength, volatility,
and typicality values should be assigned differing degrees of
perceptual importance depending on the performer.
The phrase typicality averages are shown in Figure
10(d). Enescu had the lowest typicality (TEnescu ¼ 0.31)
while Milstein (1956) showed the highest (TMilstein ¼
0.51). It is less clear what are the direct perceptual
correlates to phrase typicality, as a phrase is more than
simply the location of its maximum loudness. One
interpretation of average phrase typicality is that it
serves as a measure of the perceived uniqueness of a
performer’s phrasing strategy.
In music and the visual arts, often being different and
unique is judged to be more desirable than being a
conformist. However, Milstein, whose 1956 performance
had the highest average phrase typicality score, is widely
regarded as the greatest performer and interpreter of
Bach’s unaccompanied sonatas, which calls to question
the view that being different from others might be a
desirable quality in phrasing strategy. Thus, we leave
open the debate on subjective aesthetic judgment with
regard to a high or low typicality score.
6. Discussion and conclusion
We have developed general methodologies for extracting
beat-level tempo and for selecting between competing
loudness models for extracting dynamic data, and
applied these methodologies to eleven audio recordings
of solo violin performances of Bach’s Violin Sonata No. 2
in A minor BWV 1003. We identified expressive trends
through the use of means and ranges for contexts of
varying sizes (individual phrases, sections, and entire
pieces). Our analyses have uncovered significant differ-
ences between the use of tempo and dynamic variations
in expressive performance strategies in master violinists’
recordings of Bach’s Violin Sonata No. 2. At the beat
level, we find that the dynamic strategies are highly
consistent and systematic across performers and perfor-
mances, despite a complete lack of written guidance in
the score, so much so that we were able to devise a
systematic phrase detection algorithm, the LMPD
method, based on local maxima in loudness. In contrast,
we found the tempo strategies to be more diverse and
elude such a systematic description.
We should note that dynamic data from audio
recordings are an imperfect representation of the perfor-
mer’s expressive vision, as artifacts of the recording
process and the recording engineers’ choices inevitably
influence the result. However, while sound engineering
may change the dynamic range and distribution, it does
not erase the basic shaping of a phrase, nor the musician’s
phrasing strategy. Thus, while the consistency of global
dynamic means and ranges may in part be due to recording
artifacts, we believe the similarity of dynamic shaping at
the note-to-note and phrase-to-phrase levels to be repre-
sentative of similarity in expressive strategy.
We utilized the highly systematic relationship between
phrase structure and dynamic variation to analyse global
phrasing strategy using the LMPD method. The LMPD
method and its accompanying descriptors of phrase strength,
volatility, and typicality yield phrasing strategy analyses that
concur with certain characteristics of the violinists’ expressive
gestures. While the mathematical descriptors provide some
insight into phrasing strategy, further tests must be done to
determine their perceptual significance.
If we interpret the diversity of observed expressive
strategies to be an indicator of the constraints that guide
them, it becomes clear that tempo and dynamics are
subject to fundamentally different constraints. From a
perceptual perspective, this could be explained by the fact
that perception of tempo requires the comparison of
temporally spaced events, while dynamics can be
perceived in isolation, and almost instantaneously. From
a musical perspective, the consistency of dynamic
strategies suggests that musical phrase structure imposes
stricter constraints on dynamic variation, constraining
musicians to follow similar trajectories. It is possible that
differences in how we perceive tempo and dynamics
determine their expressive functions, which in turn
dictate the degree of structural constraint. Thus, if
tempo and dynamics highlight aspects of the
musical landscape with differing temporal resolutions,
 Quantitative analysis of phrasing strategies in expressive performance
the function of dynamics as a clarifier of musical
structure at fine-grain resolutions would force musicians
to vary dynamics more tightly according to musical
structure.
One might be tempted to hypothesize that our findings
would generalize to other instruments and, to a certain
degree, other pieces. After all, perceptual constraints on
tempo and dynamics should be the same regardless of
instrument or musical style. However, a forthcoming
study of recordings of Chopin piano music by Nicholas
Cook (manuscript made available through personal
communication, 2008) identifies recordings in which
phrases are articulated almost exclusively using tempo
as well as recordings where performers use almost
exclusively dynamics, suggesting that phrasing strategies
could be governed more by cultural constructs than
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:20 10 August 2015
perceptual constraints. While our results indicate violi-
nists employ similar expressive strategies as pianists in
the marking of phrase boundaries, further tests must be
done to reveal the extent of generality of the LMPD
method for performances of compositions by other
composers, and for other instruments, and the situations
under which the technique could be extended to analysis
of expressive tempo strategies.
Acknowledgements
We thank the reviewers for their thoughtful and construc-
tive comments and suggestions. The research has been
funded in part by a Frank H. and Eva B. Buck Foundation
Scholarship and a National Science Foundation (NSF)
grant Career-0347988. Any opinions, findings, conclusions,
or recommendations expressed in this material are those of
the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Frank
H. and Eva B. Buck Foundation or NSF.
References
Bello, J.P., Daudet, L., Abdallah, S., Duxbury, C., Davies,
M. & Sandler, S.B. (2005). A tutorial on onset detection
in music signals. IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio
Processing, 13(5), 1035–1047.
Cambouropoulos, E. (2001). The local boundary detection
model (LBDM) and its application in the study of expressive
timing. In Proceedings of the International Computer Music
Conference, Havana, Cuba, 17–22 September.
Cheng, E. (2006). Computational analysis of expression in
violin performance. Masters Thesis, Hsieh Department of
Electrical Engineering – Systems, University of Southern
California, USA.
Cheng, E. & Chew, E. (2007). A local maximum phrase
detection method and the analysis of phrasing strategies
in expressive performances. In Proceedings of Mathe-
matics and Computation in Music, the First International
Conference of the Society of Mathematics and Computa-
tion in Music, Berlin, Germany, 18–20 May.
337
Chew, Elaine, François, A.R.J., Liu, J. & Yang, A. (2005).
ESP: a driving interface for musical expression synthesis.
In Proceedings of the Conference on New Interfaces for
Musical Expression, Vancouver, Canada, 26–28 May.
Chew, E., Liu, J. & François, A.R.J. (2006). ESP: roadmaps
as constructed interpretations and guides to expressive
performance. In Proceedings of the First Workshop on
Audio and Music Computing for Multimedia, Santa
Barbara, CA, 27 October, pp. 137–145.
Chuan, C.H. & Chew, E. (2007). A dynamic programming
approach to the extraction of phrase boundaries from
tempo variations in expressive performances. In Proceed-
ings of the 8th International Conference on Music
Information Retrieval (ISMIR), Vienna, Austria, 23–27
September.
Collins, N. (2005). A comparison of sound onset detection
algorithms with emphasis on psychoacoustically
motivated detection functions. In Proceedings of the
118th Audio Engineering Society Convention, Barcelona,
Spain, 28–31 May.
Cook, N. (2008). Objective expression: analysing phrase arching
in recordings of Chopin’s Mazurkas. Manuscript made
available through personal communication, September.
Dixon, S. (2000). A lightweight multi-agent musical beat
tracking system. In Proceedings of the 6th Pacific
Rim International Conference on Artificial Intelligence,
Melbourne, Australia.
Dixon, S. (2001). Automatic extraction of tempo and beat
from expressive performances. Journal of New Music
Research, 30(1), 39–58.
Dixon, S., Goebl, W. & Widmer, G. (2002). The PERFOR-
MANCE WORM: real-time visualization of expression
based on Langner’s tempo-loudness animation. In
Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conf,
Goteborg, Sweden, 16–21 September.
Gabrielsson, A. (1987). Once again: the Theme from
Mozart’s Piano Sonata in A Major (K.331). In Action
and Perception in Rhythm and Music (pp. 81–103). Royal
Swedish Academy of Music: Stockholm.
Gabrielsson, A. (1999). Music performance. In D. Deutsch
(Ed.), The Psychology of Music (2nd ed.) (pp. 501–602).
San Diego: Academic Press.
Gabrielsson, A. (2003). Music performance research at the
millennium. Psychology of Music, 31(3), 221–272.
Hong, J.-L. (2003). Investigating expressive timing and
dynamics in recorded cello performances. Psychology of
Music, 31(3), 340–352.
Kabal, P. (2002). An examination and interpretation of
ITU-R BS.1387: perceptual evaluation of audio quality.
Technical Audio Paper, Department of Electrical and
Computer Engineering, McGill University, May 2002.
Langner, J. & Goebl, W. (2003), Visualizing expressive
performance in tempo-loudness space. Computer Music
Journal, 27(4), 69–83.
Palmer, C. & Hutchins, S. (2006). What is musical
prosody? In B.H. Ross (Ed.), Psychology of Learning
and Motivation (Vol. 46, pp. 245–278). Amsterdam:
Elsevier Press.
 338 Eric Cheng and Elaine Chew
Repp, B.H. (1998), A microcosm of musical expression. I.
Quantitative analysis of pianists’ timing in the initial
measures of Chopin’s Etude in E major. Journal of the
Acoustical Society of America, 104(2), 1085–1100.
Repp, B.H. (1999a). A microcosm of musical expression. II.
Quantitative analysis of pianists’ dynamics in the initial
measures of Chopin’s Etude in E major. Acoustical
Society of America, 105(3), 1972–1988.
Repp, B.H. (1999b). A microcosm of musical expression.
III. Contributions of timing and dynamics to the
aesthetic impression of pianists’ performances of the
initial measures of Chopin’s Etude in E major. Acoustical
Society of America, 106(1), 469–478.
Sapp, C. (2007). Comparative analysis of multiple musical
performances. In Proceedings of the International Con-
ference on Music Information Retrieval, Vienna, Austria,
23–27 September, pp. 497–500.
Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 23:20 10 August 2015
Skovenborg, E. & Nielsen, S.H. (2004). Evaluation of
different loudness models with music and speech material.
In Proceedings of the 117th Convention of the Audio
Engineering Society, San Francisco, CA, 28–31 October.
Soulodre, G.A. & Norcross, S.G. (2003). Objective measures
of loudness. In Proceedings of the 115th Audio Engineer-
ing Society, New York, 10–13 October.
Sundberg, J., Friberg, A. & Bresin, R. (2003). Attempts to
reproduce a pianist’s expressive timing with director
musices performance rules. Journal of New Music
Research, 32(3), 317–325.
Todd, N.P.M. (1992). The dynamics of dynamics: a model
of musical expression. Journal of the Acoustical Society of
America, 91(6), 3540–3550.
Todd, N.P.M. (1995). The kinematics of musical expression.
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97(3), 1940–
1949.
Widmer, G. & Goebl, W. (2004). Computational models of
expressive music performance: the state of the art.
Journal of New Music Research, 33(3), 203–216.