In Message: 29 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2002 06:50:09 -0400 David Bailey wrote: >Actually the broken circle indicated simply duple meter (either 2 or 4) >as opposed to triple meter. The distinction between 2 and 4 was >eventually made by adding a line through the C for 2.
Well, that's almost it ... The cut-C originally in mid-15th-century theory was for diminution of the time, only later did it acquire the "alla breve" connotation. There is argument over whether this later in the 16th century meant "perform faster", but in proportional mensural usage around 1450 where there was a mathematical ratio between parts or voices written with different meters, as in Glarean's "Dodecachordon" and Isaac's "Choralis Constantinus", it represents a 2:1 reduction. The "time" or "tempus" element was originally the relationship between the long and the breve -- that between breve and semibreve was called "prolation", denoted with a dot in the middle of the circle or "C". With a dot it was perfect, i.e. a 3:1, without it was 2:1. The theoretical relationship between maxima and long was called "mood", but not notated in the 15th century, except it is very occasionally seen in long rests covering three spaces of the staff, rather than the normal duple two. This sub-thread started with a guess that all this began around 1000 AD. Actually it was promulgated by Philippe de Vitry in his treatise "Ars Nova" in about 1320. But he was a far-sighted guy: although he laid the foundations of French notational theory in the 14th century it was only widely adopted some 80 years after his treatise. Some features, such as up to 7 different uses of the dot, one of which meant octave transposition (as opposed to division of the time-groups and addition (this latter our surviving modern usage)) never came in. For that we can perhaps be grateful! Andrew Parker. _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
