> On 4 Nov 2016, at 03:21, David Wright <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: > > On Thu 03 Nov 2016 at 22:08:02 (+0100), Hans Åberg wrote: >> >>> On 3 Nov 2016, at 21:28, David Wright <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>> On Thu 03 Nov 2016 at 10:37:36 (+0100), Hans Åberg wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 3 Nov 2016, at 03:04, David Wright <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> The only 13/8 I can recall off-hand is an uncomplicated 6/4+1/8. >> >>>>> Correct me if I'm wrong (I'm not familiar with these dances), but >>>>> these are just groupings of steady 16th notes, are they not. >>>> >>>> Yes, in the definition of the meter, in respons to your question whether >>>> it might be performable. 13/8 and even 13/16 is performable at moderato >>>> counting on the 1/4s, though I have no example of the 3+3+3+3+1 occurring >>>> naturally. >>> >>> But the three notes I referred to weren't in 13/8 or 13/16 because the >>> last 3 of 3+3+3+3+1 (in 13/8 time) was a made into a duplet. >> >> It was in response to your comment on 13/8 above. > > Oh, OK. Well, I'm not familiar with music in these folk-dancing > traditions, and don't particularly find it easy to pick up on > the patterns involved.
Just drop a note if you want some examples. :-) > My own experience of dancing is mainly > in the Scottish Country Dancing tradition, where such rhythmic > irregularities would be of no help at all. In a tradition where > 8-bar phrases rule, a dance like The Wee Cooper of Fife is highly > irregular, having four 10-bar phrases. I have encountered Mairi's Wedding, 8x40 reel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mairi%27s_Wedding Another type of irregularity occurs in "Adiós pueblo de Ayacucho" from Peru, which is notated in alternating 2/8 ad 4/8. The meters of the measures are ||: 2 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 4 :|| >> In the Leventikos 12/8, 12 = 3+2+2+3+2, the 3s have duplets metric accents. >>> What I was pointing out was that we have 13/8 consisting of three >>> dotted crochets followed by a duplet (two in the time of a dotted >>> crochet) followed by a quaver. The relationship of these notes is >>> 6 6 6 3 3 2 and I think most people would struggle with getting >>> that last note exactly the correct length. >> >> In irregular meters, the opposite happens: one looses the feeling for exact >> proportions. So one has to unlearn the idea of exact beats. If you want >> exact beats, then you need a sequencer track. > > If you say so. The Leventikos in 12 typically has very heavy time bends. If you do not follow that when playing along, you get out of sync a bit. >> I am not sure exactly what meter you want, but if the proportions are >> 3+3+3+3+1, then it will likely feel like a common 9 = 2+2+2+3 with a slight >> time bend shortening the last beat a bit, which is normally done. > > I don't want any meter. All I wanted to do was answer the question > posed by the OP, but using conventional notation (which, it appears, > is sufficient) rather than the rather unconventional approach IMO > posted by Joram. One can probably find a conventional notation approximation within the time bends that occur naturally. If one want a more exact representation, syncing tracks would be needed, I think. Another reason for writing a complex time signature is to make sure performers don't try to play it exactly. >> So what are your intended metric accents? If the 1/3 at the end is >> subordinate to the i/4, then your meter will sound just like a 9/8 with a >> slight time bend, unless lsowed down to a zeibekiko. > > *I* don't have any. Sorry for that. > But the OP had 4/4 plus this odd short note, so I > assumed that they want four beats and a "kick" as I have called it. > That's why four dotted crochets and a quaver match the OP's request > IMO. And we do not know the intended tempo. If it is reasonably high, it will probably sound like a 9/8, 9 = 2+2+2+3, with a typical time bend shortening of the 3. > *You* brought up the subject of dividing those dotted crochets, > I believe, in > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-11/msg00081.html Hindemith, "Elementary Training", shows such examples how tuplets can be used to simplify notation. But that is the only point of it, from the musical point of view. >>> There may be no choice to be made. Perhaps the OP wants four beats and >>> a kick, and nothing more. >> >> It is ambiguous, as it stands. > > Yes, in the sense that the OP appeared to make a mistake in specifying > the relative duration of the last note in the bar. I have assumed that your interpretation is correct, equivalent to 13 = 3+3+3+3+1. > No, in the sense that the OP didn't ask for any subdivisions so none > were given in my response, see > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-11/msg00074.html But there is no tempo given, and how strong is the accent of the 1 relative that of the 3 before it? _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user