On 30 Jun 2005 at 1:21, Owain Sutton wrote: > David W. Fenton wrote: > > But this is because I recognize only two valid interpretations for > > 6/4, 2/H. and 6/Q -- and my reason for eliminating 3/H is because I > > can't see a reason for using 6/4 to indicate what 3/2 clearly > > indicates without the confusion of the compound time signature. > > But what about when somebody wants to indicate three sub-groups of two > crotchets, where the crotchet pulse remains dominant? Ot's hardly an > unimaginable situation. What alternative would you recommend?
Well, it depends on CONTEXT, which I've said all along. And as Darcy pointed out, you are sometimes also choosing one time signature when not everybody's music is in that exact time signature. To say it one more time, I'm explicitly *NOT* talking about cases where there are shifts in the subdivision, or different subdivisions in different parts simultaneously. I was only making my assertion about music that is not shifting back and forth between groups of 2 quarters and groups of 3 quarters, music that uniformly moves in groups of 2 quarters. In that case, 6/4 seems to have no utility -- it offers nothing that 3/2 offers except vastly increased potential for confusion. -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
