From: "David W. Fenton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >I strongly disagree. The quarter=quarter interpretation is a >MIDI/playback thing.
i'm not interested in "MIDI/playback thing[s]", i'm interested in notation. i stated that finale's MIDI functioning in this case was "correct" in regards to contemporary notation. nothing else. >[in] 4/4 to 2/2, the quarter equals the quarter, but >4/4 to 12/8, the dotted quarter in the new meter by default should be >assumed to be equal to the previous quarter. this constitutes a significant contradiction in contemporary notational practice which needs to be resolved. >That is because there is a special relationship between the compound >meters and their simple meter analogs. in music composed prior to 1909, yes, but only as an exception afterwards. >But saying there aren't any standards is simply erroneous. i agree with you... btw, who said there weren't any standards? > There are >long-standing conventions and associations here. But one should not >assume that everyone is aware of them. It's better to be explicit >than to leave the performer wondering if they made the right guess. from anyone else i might accept such an argument, but not from david fenton, given your polemic views on pc and its users... amongst other things. david, i'm not interested in making any claims about the interpretation of early music, this was certainly clear in any of my posts, i am talking about contemporary notation. i am not interested in changing the performance and notational practices of 200-year old music, and will not argue for or against existing standards or isolated exceptions - however erroneous or correct or ambiguous they may be - in regards to early music. if you wish to discuss the problem as it relates to the notation of music composed after the dissolution of tonality as the _primary_ "serious" compositional realm, i'm in, if not, i have nothing more to reply to you. From: John Howell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Nevertheless, I've never come across a case in which 8 = 8 in a >switch from 4/4 to 12/8. boulez, bartok, stockhausen, nono, webern, haubenstock-ramati, beat furrer, brian ferneyhough, james dillon, ligeti, schönberg, mathias spahlinger, helmut lachenmann, rebecca saunders, james saunders, alan hilario, toshio hosokawa, kaijo saariaho, brice pauset... in fact _every single post-1909 composer_ i have personally or professionally met or studied who is *not replicating styles of the past in some [diluted] form*... From: Doug Auwarter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >...in my experience it's "pulse equals pulse" if the >composer or arranger is too lame to leave out this important indication. So >when going from 4/4 to 6/8, the quarter equals a dotted quarter; when going >from 2/4 to 2/2, the quarter equals a half, etc. [it has absolutely nothing to do with the lameness of the composer]... this ought to be contextualized and qualified: was the music "new" or an obvious replication of styles of the past? jef -- shirling & neueweise \................/ new music notation specialists mailto:shirling@;newmusicnotation.com :.../ http://newmusicnotation.com ++ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
