On 23 Mar 2008, at 10:31 PM, shirling & neueweise wrote:
This is fine for notational purposes, I guess (although I
personally would be loath to write it that way). But it won't
*feel* like a bar of 2/10 to anyone, because there's no rhythmic
point of reference. Instead, it will feel like a metric modulation.
so we should go through all the repertoire and change all instances
of works that start out with triplet values as well? holy shit, a
whooooooooooooooooole lot of jazz would have to be rewritten...
I didn't say it should be *changed*, Jef, fercrissakes. I was trying
to parse Owain's assertion that the mental countoff need not be in a
regular meter, even when a piece begins with, say, a bar of 2/10.
When a piece in 4/4 starts with a triplet pickup, the countoff is
still in 4/4.
saying a musician -- or the audience for that matter -- can't
distinguish a triplet (even if "partial") from the related non-
triplet 8th value at the start of the piece is to seriously doubt
the capacity of your musicians and audience.
Well, sorry, Jef, but until and unless an audible pulse manifests
itself, it *isn't* possible to hear that the triplets at the beginning
of a piece are, in fact, triplets. It's only when the pulse comes in
that we can retroactively say, "Oh -- those were *triplets!* And here
I'd been hearing them as quarter notes all this time!" Exploiting this
rhythmic ambiguity is one of my favorite effects.
Cheers,
- Darcy
-----
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
