At 12:11 PM -0500 11/12/02, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Is this really the general rule? What about going from, say, 4/4 to 12/8? Without any additional information, I'd assume that the beat duration remained the same, not the quarter note duration.I would "assume" the same, but anyone who makes that kind of meter change without some clue as to tempo is not providing enough information. I was taught (and always try) to always indicate new (or same) tempo no matter what, when switching meters to a different beat-note (like 4/4 to 2/2 or 2/4 to 9/8)... And even sometimes when it stays the same.
For example, in a piece that alternates, say, between 4/4 and 3/4, or which has the odd 2/4 measure, it's fairly obvious that the mixed meter doesn't mix tempos. It just needs one beginning quarter = sign and that's that. But going from 4/4 to 12/8, in Darcy's example, needs clarification. I also ASSUME, as Darcy does, that the beat, not the note duration, PROBABLY remain the same. But that's not fair. It should be confirmed. "Assume" and "probably" are not good enough. Another thing I was always taught, and always strive for, is to make written music as crystal clear as possible, and leaving any "assumption" out there isn't fair to the performer. It's hard enough to translate symbols into sound as it is.
In the original example of going from 4/4 to 2/2, I'd at first assume that the quarter note stays the same... but wait... what if the composer means the beat stays the same? You see the problem. It needs a "note equals tempo" mark, and I'd consider the omission of it an error. And a disservice to the performer.
Linda Worsley
--
Hear the music at:
http://www.ganymuse.com/
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
