On 29 Jun 2005, at 3:20 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
Oh come off of it.
I recently wrote a piece in a slow (q=72) 6/4, subdivided in three --
mostly. However, it frequently alternates between bars of 6/4 and
4/4, or 5/4, or 7/4.
It would have made absolutely no sense to use 3/2 for this, for any
number of reasons. For starters, the quarter note is the beat, not
the half note; the time signature changes would be needlessly
confusing and obscure what was actually going on if I alternated 3/2
with 4/4; etc.
It wasn't in 3, therefore, no contradiction.
Actually, it was. Most of the 6/4 measure were in a (big) three.
Obviously, I didn't conduct in three because h=36 is too slow to
conduct in half notes, but the half note actually was the pulse.
I thought we were talking about 6/4 used for pieces that were
primarily in 3 beats at the half note,
There are long sections of my piece that are primarily three beats at
the half note.
and that's what prompted my
suspicion of incompetence.
Frankly, you have a bit of a hair-trigger when it comes to accusation
of incompetence.
Question: do you think a piece in 3 half-note beats should correctly
be notated in 6/4?
I would distinguish between "should" and "could." Such a piece might
be better written in 3/2, or it might be better written in 6/4 -- but
there are many excellent reasons why someone would choose 6/4 over 3/2
for a piece in 3 half-note beats.
- Darcy
-----
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
