\times question

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

\times question

Menu Jacques
Hello folks,

The two tuplets below are visually different, but what’s the musical difference, and how should a performer play that?

Thanks for your help!

JM

--

\version "2.19.55"

\relative c' {
  \times 2/4  {
    e4 f4 g4 a4
  }
  \times 1/4  {
    b4 c4 c4 b4
  }
}



_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: \times question

David Kastrup
Menu Jacques <[hidden email]> writes:

> Hello folks,
>
> The two tuplets below are visually different, but what’s the musical
> difference, and how should a performer play that?
>
> \version "2.19.55"
>
> \relative c' {
>   \times 2/4  {
>     e4 f4 g4 a4
>   }
>   \times 1/4  {
>     b4 c4 c4 b4
>   }
> }
>

> The two tuplets [above] are visually different, but what’s the musical
> difference, and how should a performer play that?

That's just bad notation.  Either, by the way.  Factors of 2/4 and 1/4
do not make sense with \times.  They might with \scaleDurations (which
does not attach tuplet numbers) in polyrhythmical situations, but not
with a change in mid-sequence.

If you are a super-smart new-fangled composer and really really mean it,
you might want to consider explicit "2:4" and "1:4" tuplet numbers:
there is a special tuplet number formatter override for that (too lazy
to look it up right now).  Which is also helpful for distinguishing 7:4
and 7:8 (heptuplets of either persuasion can be found in scores).

In that manner, the notation becomes unambiguous again.  It doesn't
become a good idea by that, but at least one can see what is desired
from the executioner.

--
David Kastrup

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: \times question

Menu Jacques
Hello David,

Thanks for the explanations!

I’ll become a super-smart new-fangled composer only next year probably, so I’ll go along your advice for the time being...

JM

Le 6 juin 2017 à 08:51, David Kastrup <[hidden email]> a écrit :

Menu Jacques <[hidden email]> writes:

Hello folks,

The two tuplets below are visually different, but what’s the musical
difference, and how should a performer play that?

\version "2.19.55"

\relative c' {
 \times 2/4  {
   e4 f4 g4 a4
 }
 \times 1/4  {
   b4 c4 c4 b4
 }
}


The two tuplets [above] are visually different, but what’s the musical
difference, and how should a performer play that?

That's just bad notation.  Either, by the way.  Factors of 2/4 and 1/4
do not make sense with \times.  They might with \scaleDurations (which
does not attach tuplet numbers) in polyrhythmical situations, but not
with a change in mid-sequence.

If you are a super-smart new-fangled composer and really really mean it,
you might want to consider explicit "2:4" and "1:4" tuplet numbers:
there is a special tuplet number formatter override for that (too lazy
to look it up right now).  Which is also helpful for distinguishing 7:4
and 7:8 (heptuplets of either persuasion can be found in scores).

In that manner, the notation becomes unambiguous again.  It doesn't
become a good idea by that, but at least one can see what is desired
from the executioner.

-- 
David Kastrup


_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Loading...