Yes, but Frenchman Boulez may be applying the popular Gallic saying : Pourquoi faire simple quand on peut faire complique (loosely translated as : if there are 2 ways of doing something, one simple and one complicated, choose the latter) Completely OT plaintive afterthought : I don't know if referring to the French is acceptable right now : cf. NYT article : In the U.S. Nowadays, Little Love for France http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/06/arts/06FREN.html?ex=1027028771&ei=1&en=94a aadfc8281c480
-----Message d'origine----- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de John Bell Envoye : dimanche 7 juillet 2002 15:08 A : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : RE: [Finale] fractional time signatures At 09:10 pm -0300 06.07.2002, M. Perticone wrote: >mmm... check boulez's 'le marteau sans maitre'. there are some fractional >time signatures there, and *some* of them can't be written differently. and >consider this simple example: > >a 2/4 measure full of semiquavers then two quavers of a triplet (=2/3 of a >crotchet), then, in a new 2/4 measure, four semiquavers (=1 crotchet) etc >etc. It seems to me you *could* write that as 6/8,2/8,6/8 (eighth-notes always equal). It's not necessarily any easier, but does avoid the fractional time signature. Regards John _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
