Re: Polymeter - Polyrhythm - Changing Meter

["Mark Showalter" <folkstone57@operamail.com>]

Hello,

I think the overall point, which we seem to agree on, is that you write 
the arrangement in the time sig & tempo etc that makes the most sense & is 
the easiest to read. I was taugh by one of my composition teachers in 
music school that you always work from the graetest sub-division back to 
plan how you would right a piece. So, if there are 128th note values as 
the greatest sub-division, you don't write the time signature as 64/128. 
That would be ridiculous. It's still easier to have to deal with those 
notes on the ocassions they appear. If everything is written in 128th 
notes by some dummy, you simply turn them all into quarter or eigth notes 
to simplify reading, & of course, counting.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Raul Bonell <raul.bonell@gmail.com>
> To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
> Subject: Re: Polymeter - Polyrhythm - Changing Meter
> Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 20:05:57 +0200
> 
> 
> 2010/9/9 Mark Showalter <folkstone57@operamail.com>:
> 
> 
> > You can choose a ternary subdivision, they are called triplets, 
> > just as in 3/4 you can have a >duplet. No clue again what the 
> > opint is here.
> 
> i'm agree. all is possible but some are better fitted if a human mind
> will be reading. a computer won't ask you why did you choose the wrong
> one ("wrong", as it's taught in theory books, although i'd leave it in
> "less convenient"). why to choose a 2-beats meter if it's going to
> wrap a waltz?

My point wasn't that you should write a waltz that way at all. It would be 
the opposite of simple, but no listener would know that the music was 
written in 4/4 if it was properly notated, but it would be just a silly 
excersize in complex notation. 


-- 
_______________________________________________
Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way:
Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com