Owain Sutton wrote: > (7/10, 13/20) > Why? It's easily playable, and it's something that cannot possibly be > notated another way, unlike x/12. And, like it or not, it's found its > way into mainstream notation and publication.
I've never seen it. If I bought a piece of music and I saw 13/20 I would have no clue how to interpret it. My best guess would be 13 notes to the bar all equal to a quintuplet division of a quarter. Basically 2 sets of 5 sixteenths with a 5 under them, and 3 extra. Am I close? Seriously, the set of musicians who would even want to think about timing so hard to get that even close is small. Much smaller than the still-small set of musicians who can play a quintuplet accurately in the first place. I personally question the value of having such rhythms in music when there's plenty of life left in the ones most people can actually play, but hey, you write what you like, no problem with me. Still, it sounds more like architecture or graphic design than composition to me... Neal Schermerhorn _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
