On Mar 25, 2008, at 3:03 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 25 Mar 2008 at 8:19, Christopher Smith wrote:
On Mar 25, 2008, at 12:14 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
It's notational abominations that bother me.
Granted, it's an old notation system being twisted to do things it
wasn't designed for, so that's bound to result in nasty things.
But then why not propose a new notational convention?
You're not referring to the original citation by Darcy, are you?
Where is the notational abomination in that?
Tuplet meters are the abomination -- you need a new system for
indicating meter, rather than trying to shoehorn the tuplet-based
meter into the old system. I mean, the old system is broken even for
triple subdivision, and has to compromise for that!
I don't know what convention should be developed, but 10th notes just
don't make any sense whatsoever.
Oh.
Thanks for the clarification.
Well, they make sense to me. Even if it IS a new system, it is a
perfect extension of the old system, as far as I am concerned.
Christopher
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
