Music Composers Unite!
Tags:
number two because it is easier to read
#1 because it tells sight-reading musicains where the beats are.
I have no problem with 1 until the tie from beat 3 to 4 which I've never seen written like that.
I think the problem with the tie you mention Adrian is that beats 3 and 4 are beamed together as well as being tied. If the beam was broken maybe it would look better?
yes, probably. I come across these notational issues very often, and to me the second example is clearer. Any decent amateur would know where the beat lay in the second example, too. Ties are great across the bar and sometimes in the bar. I use ties instead of double dots, do you?
Depends on the situation I guess. Say the meter is 2/2 and there are two notes in the measure, the 2nd of which is an eighth. A double dotted half note and an eighth would make the rhythm perfectly clear I think (like Chopin does in Op.28 no.. 2) and maybe look a little less messy than a dotted half tied to an eighth, or a half note tied to a quarter tied to an eighth. But in most cases I think ties are better than double dots.
I also prefer the 2nd example (or maybe a mix of the two, dotted quarter to start then the rest like ex. 1, but without the beam) , but I can't say definitively that all sight readers would agree. In the end, anyone besides a complete amateur should be able to read both examples no problem.
Permalink Reply by Greg Brus on April 29, 2012 at 5:53am #2 because it has less notes and less ties to take into consideration. Notes draw more attention than ties, so when you first see #1 you might get a misleading idea of what it's supposed to sound like. #2 is neat and clear.
Personally I would replace the middle tie with a quarter note, too - for some reason though, people tend to do weird things when the precise point at which measure is split in two isn't punched right into their faces. So #2 as it is seems to be the safest way.
Very good point; the middle of the bar is a frame of reference that I (so probably most people) use for working out rhythms.
Convention is also the issue - most publishers would do something along the lines of no.2, so it is best to follow what musicians are used to.
Now, how about the old vocal scores where none of the quavers were grouped - does anyone find those difficult to read?
I can see why the convention changed to grouping quavers for vocal as well as instrumental music.
Permalink Reply by Joseph Abate on April 29, 2012 at 11:48am Thanks for the input...Although, I believe that #1 is most correct since it seems to more closely comply with the idea of the "invisible bar line" concept, It is definitely true that the tie AND bar on beats 3 to 4 is unclear. I also agree with Adrian that convention is a powerful weapon in the war on long rehearsals....
Permalink Reply by Greg Brus on April 29, 2012 at 12:05pm I do. In fact, not all the quavers are separated - when there's a single syllabe for several notes, they're grouped normally. Still, it's a pain in the bottom to read, especially if spacing is done poorly.
Adrian Allan said:
Now, how about the old vocal scores where none of the quavers were grouped - does anyone find those difficult to read?
notation practices changes with time. In some of the Beethoven string quartets a syncopation is indicated with a quarter note in one par and the dot in the next bar.
© 2013 Created by Chris Merritt.