Re: 5027: NR example with bad engraving practice

[Thomas Morley]

2017-01-06 0:04 GMT+01:00 Hans Aikema :
>
>> On 5 Jan 2017, at 23:55, Simon Albrecht  wrote:
>>
>> On 05.01.2017 23:42, Hans Aikema wrote:
 On 5 Jan 2017, at 23:16, Simon Albrecht  wrote:
>> On 04.01.2017 15:01, Hans Åberg wrote:
>>> This is just a quirk of the 4/4 [meter], also mentioned in Hindemith, 
>>> "Elementary Training", p. 30. In other words, the note should not cross 
>>> the 2nd and 4th metric accents, but it can cross the [3rd].
 I’ve never heard of that and would assume it is a peculiarity in 
 Hindemith. Can anyone cite Gould or similar on the topic?

 Best, Simon
>>> Have Gould at hand, but I think it depends on interpretation of Gould p171 
>>> in the section on Syncopation
>>>
>>> 
>>> The following common patterns are exceptions and should always be written 
>>> as follows
>>> 
>>>
>>> description of the image that follows for 4/4 time:
>>> crotchet minim crotchet  and not crotchet crotchet tie crotchet crotchet
>>>
>>> does that hold for ‘minim in the middle of the measure’ or just for an 
>>> exact crotchet minim crotchet measure?
>>
>> We are not talking about a simple syncopated rhythm like the one Gould lists 
>> as an exception (!). Of course it’s perfectly normal to write 4 2 4 in 4/4 
>> time.
>> But if the note has to be split with a tie anyway, then it should be split 
>> along the center of the measure first, unlike the NR hitherto did.
>> 8 4.~ 4 4
>> not
>> 8 8~ 2 4
>>
>> Best, Simon
>
> How I read p171 is that those are common patterns that are NOT syncopated but 
> appear to be, as it follows the following snippet of text on Syncopation:
>
> Rhythms that should not be syncopated must divide note-values to expose the 
> beats of the bar:
>
> 4/4 time 4. 4 8 4 | will be accentuated as 3 + 3+ 2 quavers : 8/8 4.-> 4-> 8 
> 4-> |
>
> unless written 4/4 4. 8~8 8 4 |
>
> The following common patterns……..



Hi all,

reading the discussion I think a lot of valid arguments for this and
that are stated. Afaict noone doubts the "not"-example is (usually)
bad practise.

So, why not show two possibilities?

\relative {
  r8 c'~ 2 r4 |
  r8^"or even" c4.~ c4 r4 |
  r8^"not" c2~ 8 r4
}

Cheers,
  Harm

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: 5027: NR example with bad engraving practice

[Hans Aikema]

> On 5 Jan 2017, at 23:55, Simon Albrecht  wrote:
> 
> On 05.01.2017 23:42, Hans Aikema wrote:
>>> On 5 Jan 2017, at 23:16, Simon Albrecht  wrote:
> On 04.01.2017 15:01, Hans Åberg wrote:
>> This is just a quirk of the 4/4 [meter], also mentioned in Hindemith, 
>> "Elementary Training", p. 30. In other words, the note should not cross 
>> the 2nd and 4th metric accents, but it can cross the [3rd].
>>> I’ve never heard of that and would assume it is a peculiarity in Hindemith. 
>>> Can anyone cite Gould or similar on the topic?
>>> 
>>> Best, Simon
>> Have Gould at hand, but I think it depends on interpretation of Gould p171 
>> in the section on Syncopation
>> 
>> 
>> The following common patterns are exceptions and should always be written as 
>> follows
>> 
>> 
>> description of the image that follows for 4/4 time:
>> crotchet minim crotchet  and not crotchet crotchet tie crotchet crotchet
>> 
>> does that hold for ‘minim in the middle of the measure’ or just for an exact 
>> crotchet minim crotchet measure?
> 
> We are not talking about a simple syncopated rhythm like the one Gould lists 
> as an exception (!). Of course it’s perfectly normal to write 4 2 4 in 4/4 
> time.
> But if the note has to be split with a tie anyway, then it should be split 
> along the center of the measure first, unlike the NR hitherto did.
> 8 4.~ 4 4
> not
> 8 8~ 2 4
> 
> Best, Simon

How I read p171 is that those are common patterns that are NOT syncopated but 
appear to be, as it follows the following snippet of text on Syncopation:

Rhythms that should not be syncopated must divide note-values to expose the 
beats of the bar:

4/4 time 4. 4 8 4 | will be accentuated as 3 + 3+ 2 quavers : 8/8 4.-> 4-> 8 
4-> |

unless written 4/4 4. 8~8 8 4 |

The following common patterns……..
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: 5027: NR example with bad engraving practice

[Hans Åberg]

> On 5 Jan 2017, at 23:55, Simon Albrecht  wrote:
> 
> On 05.01.2017 23:42, Hans Aikema wrote:
>>> On 5 Jan 2017, at 23:16, Simon Albrecht  wrote:
> On 04.01.2017 15:01, Hans Åberg wrote:
>> This is just a quirk of the 4/4 [meter], also mentioned in Hindemith, 
>> "Elementary Training", p. 30. In other words, the note should not cross 
>> the 2nd and 4th metric accents, but it can cross the [3rd].
>>> I’ve never heard of that and would assume it is a peculiarity in Hindemith. 
>>> Can anyone cite Gould or similar on the topic?
>>> 
>>> Best, Simon
>> Have Gould at hand, but I think it depends on interpretation of Gould p171 
>> in the section on Syncopation
>> 
>> 
>> The following common patterns are exceptions and should always be written as 
>> follows
>> 
>> 
>> description of the image that follows for 4/4 time:
>> crotchet minim crotchet  and not crotchet crotchet tie crotchet crotchet
>> 
>> does that hold for ‘minim in the middle of the measure’ or just for an exact 
>> crotchet minim crotchet measure?
> 
> We are not talking about a simple syncopated rhythm like the one Gould lists 
> as an exception (!). Of course it’s perfectly normal to write 4 2 4 in 4/4 
> time.
> But if the note has to be split with a tie anyway, then it should be split 
> along the center of the measure first, unlike the NR hitherto did.
> 8 4.~ 4 4
> not
> 8 8~ 2 4

Hindemith has 8 8~ 2~ 8 8.




___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: 5027: NR example with bad engraving practice

[Simon Albrecht]

On 05.01.2017 23:42, Hans Aikema wrote:

On 5 Jan 2017, at 23:16, Simon Albrecht  wrote:

On 04.01.2017 15:01, Hans Åberg wrote:

This is just a quirk of the 4/4 [meter], also mentioned in Hindemith, "Elementary 
Training", p. 30. In other words, the note should not cross the 2nd and 4th metric 
accents, but it can cross the [3rd].

I’ve never heard of that and would assume it is a peculiarity in Hindemith. Can 
anyone cite Gould or similar on the topic?

Best, Simon

Have Gould at hand, but I think it depends on interpretation of Gould p171 in 
the section on Syncopation


The following common patterns are exceptions and should always be written as 
follows


description of the image that follows for 4/4 time:
crotchet minim crotchet  and not crotchet crotchet tie crotchet crotchet

does that hold for ‘minim in the middle of the measure’ or just for an exact 
crotchet minim crotchet measure?


We are not talking about a simple syncopated rhythm like the one Gould 
lists as an exception (!). Of course it’s perfectly normal to write 4 2 
4 in 4/4 time.
But if the note has to be split with a tie anyway, then it should be 
split along the center of the measure first, unlike the NR hitherto did.

8 4.~ 4 4
not
8 8~ 2 4

Best, Simon

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: 5027: NR example with bad engraving practice

[Trevor Daniels]

Simon Albrecht wrote Thursday, January 05, 2017 10:16 PM


>>> On 04.01.2017 15:01, Hans Åberg wrote:
 This is just a quirk of the 4/4 [meter], also mentioned in Hindemith, 
 "Elementary Training", p. 30. In other words, the note should not cross 
 the 2nd and 4th metric accents, but it can cross the [3rd].
> 
> I’ve never heard of that and would assume it is a peculiarity in 
> Hindemith. Can anyone cite Gould or similar on the topic?

Well, Elaine Gould has several pages on the topic - 166-169.
That section starts:

"Note-values sustained across a beat or half-bar must expose
the beat structure of the bar:

[examples picked out are all in 4/4 time]

   8 4.~ 8 4 8 and not 8 2 4 8
   8 8 8 8~ 4. 8 and not 8 8 8 2 8

"Only very straightforward rhythms may be written across the beat
or half-bar:   4 2.  or   2 32  [are OK]"

"As the division of a bar becomes more complex, it is essential to
reveal more of the beats."

"When the rhythms are not part of a regular pattern, the long duration
may be divided to expose the beats or half-bar, to make the rhythm
easier to count.  In 4/4 it is the third (not the fourth) beat that should 
be exposed:

   2~ 4... 32  or even   2~ 4~ 8.. 32  "

So her essential message is reveal as many beats with ties as is
necessary to make the required rhythm clear.  There is no definite
rule.

Trevor
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: 5027: NR example with bad engraving practice

[Hans Aikema]

> On 5 Jan 2017, at 23:16, Simon Albrecht  wrote:
> 
>>> On 04.01.2017 15:01, Hans Åberg wrote:
 This is just a quirk of the 4/4 [meter], also mentioned in Hindemith, 
 "Elementary Training", p. 30. In other words, the note should not cross 
 the 2nd and 4th metric accents, but it can cross the [3rd].
> 
> I’ve never heard of that and would assume it is a peculiarity in Hindemith. 
> Can anyone cite Gould or similar on the topic?
> 
> Best, Simon
> 
> ___
> lilypond-devel mailing list
> lilypond-devel@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Have Gould at hand, but I think it depends on interpretation of Gould p171 in 
the section on Syncopation


The following common patterns are exceptions and should always be written as 
follows


description of the image that follows for 4/4 time:
crotchet minim crotchet  and not crotchet crotchet tie crotchet crotchet

does that hold for ‘minim in the middle of the measure’ or just for an exact 
crotchet minim crotchet measure?
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: 5027: NR example with bad engraving practice

[Hans Åberg]

> On 5 Jan 2017, at 23:16, Simon Albrecht  wrote:
> 
>>> On 04.01.2017 15:01, Hans Åberg wrote:
 This is just a quirk of the 4/4 [meter], also mentioned in Hindemith, 
 "Elementary Training", p. 30. In other words, the note should not cross 
 the 2nd and 4th metric accents, but it can cross the [3rd].
> 
> I’ve never heard of that and would assume it is a peculiarity in Hindemith. 
> Can anyone cite Gould or similar on the topic?

My scores of J.S. Bach, Orchestral Suite No. 2 in B Minor, BWV 1067 has it in a 
number of places, i.e., a half note crossing the 3rd metric accent.



___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: 5027: NR example with bad engraving practice

[Simon Albrecht]

On 04.01.2017 15:01, Hans Åberg wrote:

This is just a quirk of the 4/4 [meter], also mentioned in Hindemith, "Elementary 
Training", p. 30. In other words, the note should not cross the 2nd and 4th metric 
accents, but it can cross the [3rd].


I’ve never heard of that and would assume it is a peculiarity in 
Hindemith. Can anyone cite Gould or similar on the topic?


Best, Simon

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: 5027: NR example with bad engraving practice

[Hans Åberg]

> On 4 Jan 2017, at 19:58, Simon Albrecht  wrote:
> 
> On 04.01.2017 15:01, Hans Åberg wrote:
>> This is just a quirk of the 4/4 [meter], also mentioned in Hindemith, 
>> "Elementary Training", p. 30. In other words, the note should not cross the 
>> 2nd and 4th metric accents, but it can cross the [3rd].
> 
> You mean ‘can cross the 3rd’?

Right, typos corrected above.




___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: 5027: NR example with bad engraving practice

[Simon Albrecht]

On 04.01.2017 15:01, Hans Åberg wrote:

This is just a quirk of the 4/4 measure, also mentioned in Hindemith, "Elementary 
Training", p. 30. In other words, the note should not cross the 2nd and 4th metric 
accents, but it can cross the 2nd.


You mean ‘can cross the 3rd’?

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: 5027: NR example with bad engraving practice

[Hans Åberg]

> On 3 Jan 2017, at 23:57, Simon Albrecht  wrote:

> I know this is a bit on the edge of being too keen on my part, but I don’t 
> consider this controversial at all from my engraving experience and knowledge 
> of current best practice.
> 
> NR 1.2.1.d 
>  
> correctly says that ‘Ties should also be used when note values cross larger 
> subdivisions of the measure’. However the example highlights (in 4/4 time)
> 
> 8 8~ 2 r4
> 
> as good example, where the half note still crosses the largest subdivision in 
> the measure.

This is just a quirk of the 4/4 measure, also mentioned in Hindemith, 
"Elementary Training", p. 30. In other words, the note should not cross the 2nd 
and 4th metric accents, but it can cross the 2nd.



___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel