An account of dynamics in timbre in qin music would follow much the same angle as we saw with rhythm. Here again there is little real systematization (at least across the various mutually contradictory treatises), but the tradition permits a huge range. Indeed, fine control of dynamic and timbral elements is a highly distinctive focus of Chinese music, with these two elements typically conflated under a heading like “substance” or “touch”. There are infinite ways to activate the sound of an instrument, and Chinese music has devoted unsurpassed attention to subtleties of “flavor,” “touch,” and other subjective terms we must use to conjure up rich, thick feelings about a musical line, phrase, or note. In fact, if other monophonic systems are best-known for their theoretical investment in scales and melodic patterns, the Chinese tradition of formal theory is overwhelmingly concerned with the “character” or “three-dimensional profile” of each note in a piece.

This may not be easy to understand (I certainly haven’t done a good job of presenting it so far), so without further ado I turn the mic over to Li Xiangting. This leading contemporary qin master has written a modern neo-classical manifesto of qin aesthetics (which you can find here), in the style of the late imperial treatises. After spending the requisite time talking on the philosophical and extramusical planes, he drops down to the technical level and discusses the “eight standards” of qin performance. These are (1) light/heavy, (2) fast/slow, (3) square/circular, (4) firm/gentle, (5) thick/distilled, (6) bright/dark, (7) empty/full, and (8) discrete/continuous. Every note, apparently, necessarily has scores along all 8 polarities. That means next time you strum your guitar or plunk some keys on your piano, you’re generating sounds with particular degrees of lightness, circularity, distillation, and darkness, all of which qualities are distinct! The classical Chinese master must control all of these elements in the execution of each note.

The selection of 8 polarities is of course just one possible scheme: other writers have employed more, and one could theoretically add new ones like “chewiness/resistance to chewing” or “paper/plastic.” All such terms are essentially poetic images meant to draw your attention to different aspects of the activated sound. The Chinese view is of sound as a complex, textured, reactive, 3-dimensional entity that can be manipulated in many different ways. This theoretical and aesthetic focus accounts for the emphasis on ornamentation and attack in Chinese music: it employs a huge variety of vibrati, glissandi, note-to-note transitions, and physical techniques for sounding each instrument according to differential pressure, angle, and duration.

This attentiveness to dynamic and timbral detail can be seen as the technical manifestation of the dense allusiveness and meaning-ladenness of the classical repertoire. For each meaning and image contained in the “Drunkenness” piece, there is a particular correct or appropriate configuration of “circularity,” “distillation,” “chewiness,” and “paperiness.” Masters will largely distinguish themselves by their highly individual application of dynamic and timbral effects. Li Xiangting, for instance, is distinctive for his short, powerful attacks animated with delicate vibrati and ending in rapid decays; his fellow-student Wu Wenguang by softer attacks, more pressure differences, and a more “liquid” or continuous approach to the notes. All of this takes place on a plane distinct from the more ordinary or universal focus on rhythm and melody. Masters may change rhythmic and pitch patterns among notes all they like, but what is distinctly Chinese is the intense attention to the character of each individual note in the patterns. The density of dynamic and timbral ideas in Chinese music is yet another way Chinese musicians overcome the limitations of their scale system.