> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Stiller > Sent: 02 May 2007 22:05 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Finale] Conducting in 12/8 > > > > On May 2, 2007, at 2:41 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: > > > > > I don't believe there is such a meter as 12 8ths to the measure. We > > have a meter called 12/8, but it's in 4, and notating in that meter > > implies certain things about the music. If those implications are > > inappropriate for the music you're writing, then don't use a meter > > that implies that. > > That's a little too rigid. I can easily imagine a > contemporary composer > wishing to group, say, 3+2+3+4 eighth notes into a single > measure. If > the context included constantly changing meters, all with 8 on the > bottom, then a measure of 12/8 would not, IMO, automatically imply 4 > dotted Q to any educated musician. > > Andrew Stiller
I agree with both of you ;) 12/8 alone does indeed have very fixed implications. A grouping of 3+2+3+4 or whatever is perfectly acceptable and possible, but there needs to be explicit indication of this (through beaming, symbolic indication, etc., depending on context). And the latter suggestion, of constantly-changing x/8 metres, is a very good point. One I've encountered regularly, actually, but never given this situation much thought. I don't think I'd ever hit 12/8 in these, perhaps because 12 beats was just too many, with most bars being 2-5 quavers. Perhaps it was simply that when I was working in that context, the concept of compound time signatures never crossed my mind? _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
