David W. Fenton wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 at 11:07, shirling & neueweise wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
> I would much prefer something like:
david, coming from you, this kind of comment is like someone who
doesn't (want to) swim and hates being in water stating his
preference for fresh water lakes over saltwater seas.
i would suggest that 3+2+3+2+2/12 is no different than your example,
as did owain, but there is conceptual blockage here, so i won't
bother.
No, it's not in any respect the same, as my alternative uses numbers
that indicate actual note values, not the fraction of a whole note.
You're right that this is an unresolvable dispute.
You're approach screams "musically illiterate" to me, and leaves out
the most important parts of music, rhythmic subdivision.
There is no chance of my ever accepting /12 time signatures because
they are fundamentally opposed to everything I know about music,
meter and rhythm.
Everything you know *so far* about music, metre and rhythm, perhaps.
It is a perfect example of everything I hate about
certain schools of rhythmic thought, where rhythm is additive rather
than metric.
What on earth does this mean? And does it relate to anything that has
been talked about?
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
