I think the Wikipedia article is largely correct--as correct as any
article of such short length can be. I also think your general
denigration of Wikipedia is uninformed. Wikipedia is surprisingly
self-correcting and accurate. Detailed comparisons have been made
between Wikipedia articles and Britannica. I think there is some
disagreement about the outcome, but many quite well-informed people
believe Wikipedia is as accurate as Britannica.
There is no more definitive engraving handbook than Ross, although even
I find elements to quibble with him. Often his comments are incomplete
and even inconsistent. But as to whole rests as measure rests, he is
quite clear. "...[the whole rest] now commonly serves as a symbol for
most completely silent measures, regardless of meter or time signature.
(The exceptions would be measures in 4/2 or 8/4 time, which use a
double-whole rest.." (p. 173.) From these comments I would generalize
that any time signature smaller than 4/2 takes a whole rest as a
full-measure rest.
Ross evades ambiguity in 3/2 time by disallowing the whole rest in any
other context than a full-measure rest. He is silent about, e.g., 7/4.
The Wikipedia article also allows that whole notes *occasionally*
(emphasis added) are used as full measure values. With this
qualification, I think it is correct. The only example I can find
quickly is the last bar of the Brahms Chorale Prelude for organ, No. 3,
"O Welt, ich muss dich lassen". But I think it happens occasionally in
other keyboard music as well, esp. on final notes. For an article the
length of the Wikipedia article, it would probably have been better not
to mention whole notes in this context, because the usage is rather rare
and specialized, esp. compared with the usage of whole rests. But
technically it is correct.
John Howell wrote:
Hello Mr Howell,
Can you tell me if this information found at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whole_note is accurate?
The whole rest, and occasionally the whole note, are also used in a
more general way in time signatures other than 4/4; there they can
represent the entire measure, regardless of how many whole notes would
ordinarily fit in. For example, a whole rest may have a length equal
to five beats if used in 5/4 time. If followed by a quarter note,
however, it will have the ordinary value.
The question is specific to the whole note symbol representing an
entire measure regardless of the time signature just as the whole rest
does. I can't find anyone that will give me a definitive yes or no
answer on whether or not the whole note symbol can be used outside of
a 4/4 time signature.
Thanks!
My reply:
No, the Wikipedia article is wrong. This does not surprise me, since a
website that is essentially a communal blog is pretty unreliable as a
reference!
Whole rests are routinely used for full measure rests in meters like 4/4
and smaller. In theory they can also represent full measure rests in
meters with more than 4 quarter notes, but careful engraving will
usually give the actual number of beats of rest.
As to the whole note itself, it is NEVER used to represent anything
other than the duration of 4 quarter notes, and NEVER used to represent
a full measure in meters with more than 4 quarter notes. In such cases
it is still worth 4 quarter notes and no more.
Now, having expressed my opinion, I'm going to forward your question to
the FinaleList, which includes a lot of people with very wide experience
in notation and engraving, to see whether they agree with me! I'll let
you know what they say.
John
--
Robert Patterson
http://RobertGPatterson.com
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
