On 29 Jun 2005, at 1:15 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
You seem to think there's nothing inherently illogical about using
6/4 for a 3 subdivision. I think it goes against the whole
organization of the way time signatures work, using something that
clearly means one thing (2 beats) to mean something else for which
there's another, simpler symbol (3/2).
To me, it smells of borderline incompetence, a lack of comprehension
of the way the notational system actually works.
Oh come off of it.
I recently wrote a piece in a slow (q=72) 6/4, subdivided in three --
mostly. However, it frequently alternates between bars of 6/4 and 4/4,
or 5/4, or 7/4.
It would have made absolutely no sense to use 3/2 for this, for any
number of reasons. For starters, the quarter note is the beat, not the
half note; the time signature changes would be needlessly confusing and
obscure what was actually going on if I alternated 3/2 with 4/4; etc.
- Darcy
-----
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
