Dude...
I bet Conlon Nancarrow has some even shorter values... though the
interest in it would be only theoretical...
Am 15.05.2018 um 17:44 schrieb John Mardinly:
OK, it gets worse: the last part of the Wikipedia article that initially
ignored mentions notes down to 4096th with 10 beams:
The next note value shorter than the two hundred fifty-sixth
note is the five hundred twelfth note with seven flags or beams; it is half as
long as the two hundred fifty-sixth note. After this would come the one
thousand twenty-fourth note (eight flags or beams), the two thousand
forty-eighth note (nine flags or beams), the four thousand ninety-sixth note
(ten flags or beams), and so on indefinitely, with each note half the length of
its predecessor. The shortest note value to have ever been used in a published
work is the 1024th note (notated incorrectly as a 2048th) in Anthony Philip
Heinrich's Toccata Grande Cromatica from The Sylviad, Set 2, written around
1825; 256th notes occur frequently in this piece, and some 512th notes also
appear; the passage is marked grave but the composer also intended a hu!
ge ritardando.[3]For comparison, the shortest notated duration supported by
Finale is a 4096th note,[9] while LilyPond can write notes with up to 27 beams,
as short as a 1073741824th (= 2−30) note.[10] 512th notes are easily accessible
in Sibelius as of version 5.
Brian Ferneyhough uses many note and rest values well smaller than 256th in his
2014 work Inconjunctions. In addition to occasional 512th and 1024th rests,
there are multiple examples of 4096th notes. Many of these are also contained
within tuplets, making their ratio to the whole note even smaller.[11]
So now what; belly laugh or enormous groan...
A. John Mardinly, Ph.D., P.E.
On May 15, 2018, at 3:25 AM, Rainer <rads.bera_g...@t-online.de> wrote:
Frankly speaking, the main reason for my post was the ridiculous
demisemihemidemisemiquaver :)
Rainer
On 15.05.2018 04:12, howard posner wrote:
On May 14, 2018, at 8:49 AM, John Mardinly <john.mardi...@asu.edu> wrote:
According to Wikipedia, here are some instances: the second movement
(Largo) of Beethoven's Third Piano Concerto (Op. 37) (1800), to notate rapid
scales
I just looked at/listened to it:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3Dl3qEckWYUDE&d=DwIFaQ&c=l45AxH-kUV29SRQusp9vYR0n1GycN4_2jInuKy6zbqQ&r=VLPJ8OE-c_C6joGeE1ftlvxMmQPq9N6mpKZONBRt90E&m=dSRIIS6aD_TrYLyG1DX8zCz_6J04Ig6QkqUjyAu-6iE&s=Fv7MI3cq_LGyMLX8l4TLUKrv0DEUHFJiL7Da8-HEm80&e=
and if there are any actual 256th notes, I missed them (entirely possible,
given that online scores can be fuzzy to the point where I could miss six beams
instead of five) although there are some 128th-note tuplets which I suppose are
faster than regular 128th notes. (And of course, I may have been looking at a
cleaned-up later edition.) The whole thing makes my eyes ache. Critics
complained about Beethoven’s use of such bizarre note values.
To get on or off this list see list information at
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cs.dartmouth.edu_-7Ewbc_lute-2Dadmin_index.html&d=DwIFaQ&c=l45AxH-kUV29SRQusp9vYR0n1GycN4_2jInuKy6zbqQ&r=VLPJ8OE-c_C6joGeE1ftlvxMmQPq9N6mpKZONBRt90E&m=dSRIIS6aD_TrYLyG1DX8zCz_6J04Ig6QkqUjyAu-6iE&s=WNK1zj-ZekbgU7ssypZ3o57rWUxYLWvJtv9vYkIS0Ss&e=
