The opening measures of Ockeghem's three-section motetSalve Regina present interesting problems in the analysis of meter, rhythm, and phrasing. Previous accounts of works like it have stressed "negative stylistic" features such as asymmetry, non-pulsatile rhythm, and avoidance of clarity in phrase structure. 1 In this way, Ockeghem's work has been characterized in terms of what does not occur rather than what actually happens. In the present study, I attempt to provide a reassessment in positive terms of these negative features by adopting a functional approach to pitch and time which brings out the piece's structural richness.In order to do this, it seems desirable to coordinate statements about tonality and rhythm in terms of specific pitch and time constructs. The temporal constructs to be invoked here consist of metrical hierarchies and, by extension, hierarchies of spans.Pitch constructs appropriate to this work include modes, "chords," and cadences. Throughout this study, I try to bring the two types of structures together, to observe how they can be coordinated in an interpretation of the Ockeghem excerpt, and, most importantly, to evaluate the results. In order to accomplish the latter task, one must have access to a set of evaluative criteria.
Evaluative CriteriaFollowing the lead of Benjamin Boretz's discussion iǹ `Meta-Variations, " 2 one can approach the criteria to be adopted here in terms of four injunctions which are applicable to many pieces: 1) establish the greatest possible number of similarities among the values and relationships by which a piece is interpreted; 2) invoke the smallest possible number of types of values and relationships; 3) employ the smallest possible number of primitive, undefined concepts; 4) achieve the closest 118 Music Theory Spectrum approximation to the observables of the piece. In the case of the first two directives, it should be noted that if 1 is followed but not 2, the result will be an interpretation which is merely complicated rather than complex, and which features diversity rather than variety. If 2 is followed at the expense of 1, the resulting interpretation will be merely simplistic rather than simple and will be marked by uniformity rather than unity. Injunction 3 is formal in significance and insures economy in the sense of Ockham's razor;3 directive 4 is empirical in import and guarantees fidelity to the observables. Injunction 4 is assumed in any creditable interpretation; it merely forces one to give an accurate account of all the musical events isolated for analysis.Depending on the cases at hand, this general evaluative approach can be translated into specific sets of criteria. In the present case, the criteria can be summarized under the following headings: commetricity (i.e., "non-syncopatedness") of attack patterns4 and coordination of pitch and time constructs. With 3An attempt to come to terms with injunction 3 appears in the author's
