摘要：This commentary examines Huron and Veltman’s article from the perspective of historical musicology. The following issues are discussed: • The authors regard modes as conceptual categories of the medieval listener, which seems unlikely on historical and theoretical grounds. • Pitch class profiles are not a good way of capturing the melodic nature of the modes. • The diatonic rather than the chromatic scale should be employed as the reference pitch system for the modes. • The tentative explanation of the transition from modality to tonality ignores the fundamental differences between modes and keys, and the role of polyphony in this supposed transition. The article’s methodology, to apply quantitative methods to problems of historical musicology, is fundamentally sound, and suggestions are made in this commentary as to how its shortcomings can be amended by reformulating research questions and redesigning methods.
