Ecological Models of Musical Structure in Pop-rock, 1950–2019 Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Nicholas J. Shea, M.A., B.Ed. Graduate Program in Music The Ohio State University 2020 Dissertation Committee: Anna Gawboy, Advisor and Dissertation Co-Advisor Nicole Biamonte, Dissertation Co-Advisor Daniel Shanahan David Clampitt Copyright by Nicholas J. Shea 2020 Abstract This dissertation explores the relationship between guitar performance and the functional components of musical organization in popular-music songs from 1954 to 2019. Under an ecological theory of affordances, three distinct interdisciplinary approaches are employed: empirical analyses of two stylistically contrasting databases of popular-music song transcriptions, a motion-capture study of performances by practicing musicians local to Columbus, Ohio, and close readings of works performed and/or composed by popular- music guitarists. Each offers gestural analyses that provide an alternative to the object- oriented approach of standard popular-music analysis, as well as clarification on issues related to style, such as the socially determined differences between “pop” and “rock” music. ii Dedication To Anna Gawboy, who is always in my corner. iii Acknowledgments Here I face the nearly insurmountable task of thanking those who have helped to develop this research. Even as all written and analytical content in this document is my own, I cannot deny the incredible value collaboration has brought to this inherently interdisciplinary study. I am extremely fortunate to have a small team of individuals on which I can rely for mentorship and support and whose research backgrounds contribute greatly to the domains of this document. Foremost, I express my continuing gratitude to my advisor Anna Gawboy. When I first arrived at Ohio State, I presented her with a hunch I had about the relationship between guitar performance and the functional organization of rock music, along with a rough plan to investigate it more thoroughly. It is through her decisiveness and acumen as a mentor that the project came to fruition, as she wrote countless letters of support for grants, edited my proposals, and challenged me to think more carefully about the real-world implications of my work. Where others were skeptical or hesitant about the project’s reach, her unwavering support gave me the encouragement to maintain that this line of research is indeed worth pursuing (even if we both consistently refer to it as “ambitious”). It is a testament to her mentorship that I was able to conduct the following theoretical, empirical and behavioral analyses over the course of two short years post candidacy. Daniel Shanahan’s contributions to the project are also difficult to quantify. Even before his official arrival at OSU, Dan has likewise been in full support of my research: offering materials and thoughts on methodology over countless cups of coffee, connecting me with individuals such as Craig Sapp, pushing me to be more precise in the scientific aspects of the project, describing the merits of Bayesian statistics, and editing grant iv applications. Dan, in many ways, embodies the ideal interdisciplinary music researcher. This is something to which I aspire now and in future work. My thanks to him and his open door. Nicole Biamonte’s research on rock music acts as one of the earliest influences on this study, as I find her work exemplifies the intersection of theory and practice in popular- music analysis. Her direct support as a co-advisor for the dissertation has likewise been invaluable. Aside from keen edits and a consistent stream of resources and readings to consider, Nicole brings an unmatched specialization to the study—an expertise formative in my attempts to bridge schools of musical thought. I find it difficult to imagine the shape of this project without her contributions. There are of course many others to recognize: David Clampitt for his edits to this document, enriching coursework, and regular meetings about my progress; Christopher White for his continuing mentorship since my time at UMass Amherst; Ian Quinn, Jonathan De Souza and Michèle Dugay for their feedback at various stages of the project; Craig Sapp for the timely and generous development of the project’s Humdrum component; Leo Glowacki for developing the R and Python code for the initial analysis at SMPC (and for teaching me about global variables); Oded Huberman and Vita Berezina-Blackburn for their guidance crafting the motion-capture rig; student corpus encoders Tristan Collins, Hannah Moore, Cooper Wood and Sarah Nichols; and of course my friends in the music cognition lab, Sammy Gardner, Sam Burgess, and Lindsey Reymore. To Lindsey, in particular, I am very grateful for her camaraderie during this past year. I close by offering my love and thanks to my family; my parents Trice, Jack and John, and siblings Brendan and Tabitha for their support from afar; and finally, to my partner Abigail, who continues to extend me nothing but patience, love and grace. v Vita 2013 B.M. Music Education, University of Missouri-St. Louis 2017 M.A. Music Theory, University of Massachusetts Amherst 2017–2020 Graduate Teaching Associate, Music Theory, The Ohio State University 2020 Assistant Professor of Music Theory, Arizona State University Fields of Study Major Field: Music vi 1. Table of Contents Page ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................................... II DEDICATION ................................................................................................................................. III ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................. IV VITA ................................................................................................................................................... VI FIELDS OF STUDY ....................................................................................................................... VI LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................................... IX CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1 Structure of the document ........................................................................................................................................... 3 Stylistic Terminology .................................................................................................................................................... 6 Use of Statistics .............................................................................................................................................................. 8 CHAPTER 2: INSTRUMENTS AND STYLE ............................................................................. 9 Multi-modal Perceptual Symbols ................................................................................................................................ 9 Instruments of Music Theory.................................................................................................................................... 13 Producers and Style ..................................................................................................................................................... 15 Surface-level Features and Perception ..................................................................................................................... 22 Multi-modal Function ................................................................................................................................................. 25 CHAPTER 3: GESTURE AS FUNCTION IN ROCK ............................................................ 28 Affordances .................................................................................................................................................................. 31 Analysis: Affordances in “All Day and All of the Night” .................................................................................... 34 Five principles of rock guitar performance ............................................................................................................ 39 A Cartesian Model of Guitar Performance ............................................................................................................. 41 Function of Open Strings .......................................................................................................................................... 44 Instrument Distinction in Functional Analysis ...................................................................................................... 51 STYLISTIC FEATURES OF MODAL ROCK SONGS ..................................................................................... 55 Biamonte Modal-Pentatonic Corpus ....................................................................................................................... 55 Materials and Method ................................................................................................................................................. 56 Harmony: The Surface of Rock Music ...................................................................................................................