Hello, On 8 October 2012 14:19, Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net> wrote: > On 10/08/2012 01:29 PM, James wrote: >> >> I have the good fortune to play with >> semi-professionals and also teachers who when I queried said [I >> paraphrase], well sure I guess you could technically call them that, >> but 'no one really does' and besides when do you stop calling them >> their numerically accurate names (dodecatuplet)? > > > Your problem isn't really what to call them, but just that once you get > beyond the examples already cited there is no standard meaning.
Exactly. > > 2-, 3-, 5-, 6- and 7-tuplets all have a well-defined standard interpretation > as respectively 2:3, 3:2, 5:4, 6:4 and 7:4, although the last is a more > recent standardization not uniformly found in earlier musical examples. 9 > is tricky -- it's as likely to be 9:6 as 9:8. Ironically 11 is probably > better standardized as 11:8, at least these days; and I'm not sure I'd be > confident in saying that 4-tuplets are almost always 4:6 rather than 4:3. > But really, once you get beyond 7 there is no definitive standard ratio, and > hence no real grounds for a dedicated named command. Well in all honesty my orchestral colleagues at least, would call *any* instance of a tuplet with X as it's definer a 'X tuplet' regardless of beat or fraction. So a slew of notes with a 5 above it is a 'five-tuplet' and while I rarely see these more esoteric/eclectic 9:8, 11:8 - the name becomes irrelevant compared to 'how do you play the damned thing' and apart from composers I probably doubt that 'most' instrumentalists will work it out but simply try to fit those notes in the rhythm without consciously thinking about if it is 9:7 or 9:8 etc. I wondered if we were getting bogged down with adding more functions, if there is a legitimate reason apart from just being linguistically correct, then I am all for it of course (likewise if I can use \tuplet 5:4 instead of having to worry about using \quintuplet or is it \quiplet :) then the rest of you can have at it. WWGS? (what would Gould say?) Unituplets anyone? James _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel