On 09 Feb 2004, at 05:01 PM, Christopher BJ Smith wrote:
It looks to me that the difference between your first solution and this
quarter rest - eighth rest - a triplet consisting of: an eighth note followed by a sixteenth note, half rest
is only the length of the last note. If you needed the last note longer, why not just tie it to a sixteenth or eighth, rather than to a triplet value that doesn't get completed?
Because it's not my piece.
I totally agree with you that there will be little (if any) discernible difference between the original notation and the alternatives you suggest, but I just by looking at the piece, I can tell that the composer has certain conceptual reasons for preferring triplets here, and I'm guessing that for him, those reasons are going to trump practicality every time.
- Darcy
There are some good reasons I can think of for his notation, for example, if another instrument somewhere IS covering that last eighth note triplet, then it makes it easier to get together as an ensemble if the entire tuplet is notated. I have even seen quintuplet eighths, two sets to the measure, but I only played the first note of each set, and yet I had the whole tuplet notated! It looked weird at first glance (why not write eighth note, eight rest, quarter rest?) but I quickly discovered that having the entire tuplet notated there made it WAY easier to keep the time together.
I guess you know better than I do, but I would still go with the triplet normally notated, obscuring the third beat.
Christopher
"Why, if you were to choose the weevil that was bigger, you would be wrong, sir! You must always choose the lesser of two weevils!" Captain Aubry in "The Far Side of the World" (paraphrased)
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
