Oh, I didn't talk to him, could you call him, I'm at work, and I can't find his email on this computer.
Joel ________________________________ From: David W. Fenton <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thu, March 18, 2010 4:37:34 PM Subject: Re: [Finale] composers and new effects On 18 Mar 2010 at 17:22, Andrew Stiller wrote: > The inequality was applied at the sixteenth note level, the weak notes > being just a tiny bit longer than 1/2 the duration of the strong notes. That's pretty interesting, in that it shows that even where it was mechanically possible to precisely encode the rhythm, it wasn't 2:1. Do you have any recollection of the exact ratio? Or how much "tiny bit longer" was? 3:2 or something closer to 2:1 than that? In any event, it also doesn't necessarily tell us what a contemporary performer on an instrument that could play dynamics would have done. So far as I'm aware, a music box can't play loud and soft, no? Thus, using rhythm would be the only way to simulate inegal. My experience (limited though it may be) is that harpsichordists are the least flexible in regard to playing inegal in anything but something approaching 2:1. Harpsichordists can actually do a lot with length, whereas music boxes cannot, so I'd think that would exacerbate the problem. -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
