I just had to come out of lurk mode for this: tim wrote: > all of them. > > rhythmn is always based on one integral periodic 'pulse'. if > time is not divisible by this atom, there is no musical time.
Nancarow, Ives, Stockhausen, Xenakis, Boulez, Schaeffer, Henry etc. etc in the classical field Taylor, Sun Ra, Ornette Coleman, Coltrane, Mengelberg, Broetzman, Zorn, Ayler etc etc in jazz/impro lots of ambient stuff that I don't know the names of. lots of acapella vocal music from various cultures. There can be easily multiple time-frames going happening in a single piece of music that have non-lineair relationships. A computer can also be used to make sounds that a player cannot make. A sequencer/daw will also be used for non-musical ordering of sounds in time. It might be handy to use an extended beat/measure structure for setting event frames for dialog editing for a radio play. BTW measure are much more complicated than just A/B. Even a 6/8 is really 2/ 2.6666666.... in a way. Unless it is divided differently. See Brahms for nice examples of playing with the groupings of eight notes in 4/4. The notation x/y is just a shorthand in classical music _notation_, that only becomes meaningfull in the context of other notation parameters, such a note-beam groupings etc. So notating 17/16 instead of 4.25/4 is fine, because the score gives the grouping information. (to the player and conductor) Although I have written (4+1/2) / 4 because I wanted to mae sure that the piece s counted that way and not in 9/8 (=3+3+3). Anyway my point is that the A/B concept of measure if only really relevant if your dealing with western _notation_, and then together with the entire score. going back to lurk mode now Gerard
