104 Correspondence. [j"„ 



portance than that the bird sings in triple time. When the bird does not 

 sing in any particular time, the duration of the song in seconds is practically 

 the only time character that we can record with accuracy. 



Mr. Moore founds a large amount of his criticism on his evident belief 

 that I denied the existence of rhythm in bird songs in general. When one 

 assumes the role of critic it becomes his duty to read carefully that which 

 he is going to criticise. Otherwise he is liable to waste space and time 

 criticising errors that origmated in his own faulty reading or interpreta- 

 tion. I was particularly careful not to deny the existence of rhythm in 

 bird songs, for I was entirely aware that Some of my records were rhythmic. 

 • What I did wish to make clear was that a great many bird songs are not 

 rhythmic, and that for that reason a method of recording time which 

 depends on a mathematical relation between the durations of single notes 

 is not suited to bird songs. 



Mr. Moore makes some curious distinctions between the meanings of the 

 words time and duration, and concludes from this that I have ignored 

 time and rhythm. Does Mr. Moore think that I measure the duration 

 of the song as a whole, only? Does he believe that the lengths of the 

 separate notes on the record are meaningless? This is evidently what he 

 does think, for how else could he conclude that the graphic method does 

 not record rhythm? How else could he get the notion that the rhythm in 

 some of the records is obscured by the method? What difference would 

 it make had I used the word time instead of duration? None whatever, 

 for duration and time are one and the same factor. Mr. Moore would 

 have us think that duration does not include rhythm. Yet he himself 

 says that a knowledge of "the relative duration of the individual notes of 

 a song. . . .would result in some knowledge of the song's rhythm." That 

 is true. And in some cases it would result in a knowledge of the song's lack 

 of rhythm. Mr. Moore implies that I am unable to record rhythm by 

 the graphic method, yet he proves the contrary himself. He tells us that 

 he has found rhythm in some of the records, particularly that of the robin. 

 Yes, the rhythm is there, showing plainly at a glance. Mr. Moore, with 

 his musician's mind, must needs reduce it to measures and triple time in 

 order to see it, but those who are not so well versed in music can see it too, 

 by the horizontal lengths of the phrases and pauses. Rhythm, when it 

 exists, can be recorded by the graphic method just as accurately as by any 

 other. Even when it is retarded or accelerated the stop-watch checks it 

 up, in spite of Mr. Moore's statement to the contrary, and not only checks 

 it, but shows just how much retardation and acceleration there is. 



But it is when the song does not happen to be rhythmic that the graphic 

 method shows its greatest utility. The old method must make the song 

 rhythmic in order to record it. Every note of the song must have a mathe- 

 matical relation in length to every other note. Now a bird may sing notes, 

 the relative durations of which are totally incommensurable. Shall we 

 change such a song in order to make it fit our method? Is such a pro- 

 ceeding scientific accuracy? Or is it the conception of a musician, so 



