On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 12:13:22 -0400, Christopher BJ Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:At 10:24 PM -0600 7/13/04, shirling & neueweise wrote: >christopher, in all the cases i have seen using what are now >commonly given the unfortunate name of "irrational" time signatures >(*), the "whole" value implied is the whole note. 1/6 is indeed >one-sixth of a whole note (quarter note triplet, as you wrote).
Thank you. I am glad I have not been blowin' smoke all these years.
I haven't been following this thread all that closely, but I've come up with a question: in, for example, 3/6 meter, do you still have to mark the notes as three triplet quarters? Or does the 6 on the bottom imply that all quarters have quarter-triplet value?
Yes, I would do so. I probably wouldn't write 3/6, though, as this situation is better covered by 2/4, 4/8, or 1/2, depending on the context. It is quite possible to have one instrument playing REAL quarters while another instrument playes the tuplet, so it is best to keep everything clean and clear.
In a measure of 2/6 (an incomplete triplet) I would write 2 quarters with a bracketted 3. I know it's weird to see a triplet with only 2 notes inside the bracket, but it actually feels OK to perform it.
Christopher _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
