On 8 Jul 2005 at 23:29, Owain Sutton wrote: > David W. Fenton wrote: > > On 8 Jul 2005 at 23:00, Owain Sutton wrote: > > > >>David W. Fenton wrote: > >> > >>>I don't see what double decimal point precision of tempo markings > >>>accomplishes in that regard. > >>> > >>>I can't see any obvious meaning to 60.75. > >> > >>I gave an explanation of this earlier - but to summarise, it's > >>derived as a 9:8 ratio from Q=54. > > > > You seem to not understand the meaning of the word "obvious." > > > > Wouldn't it be more clear to just state the ratio, rather than using > > a metronome marking that is completely impossible to get from a > > metronome, or to perform, or to perceive? > > > > It's a proportional relationship between the parts of the piece, so > > why should it not be represented as a proportion? Why obscure that > > fact by converting the proportional relationship to something else? > > Because of what I've said elsewhere, that some of these markings are > approached via accel/rit instructions. How would you show the > proportional change, given this added element?
I don't know. I have a fundamental lack of understanding of what is desired tempo-wise and rhythmically in these kinds of scores. Notations like 60.75 beats to the minute and time signatures of 5/12 don't make it any clearer to me. -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
