Hi Owain,
The point I was trying to make is that unlike standard time
signatures, a tuplet-base time signature like 5/6 can't stand on its
own -- it only makes sense relative to a non-tuplet-base time sig.
Even if the first measure is 5/6, your mental countoff still has to be
quarter notes, so you know where the "sixth note" (quarter-note
triplet) is.
I'm aware Ferneyhough does the sort of thing you describe, but I'm not
entirely convinced it's playable by humans, nor feelable by a
listener. Third-notes and sixth-notes set against a regular 4/4 grid
are one thing -- tenth-notes (i.e., incomplete eighth-note
quintuplets) are quite another.
Performances of Ferneyhough (at least the ones I've heard) tend to be
approximate at best. I don't fault the performers -- I very much doubt
the composer could clap his own rhythms with any accuracy either.
This is pretty much the opposite of Michael Gordon's music, where the
whole point is to make you feel the clash of "irrational" rhythms
grinding against a regular pulse.
Cheers,
- Darcy
-----
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
On 22 Mar 2008, at 8:06 PM, Owain Sutton wrote:
A slight digression, perhaps, but I take issue with the line in the
blog
which says "You can't start in 5/6 -- you have to be chugging merrily
along in 4/4 or whatever, and then switch gears to go into 5/6 for a
measure, and then go back to a "rational" time signature."
One example which goes against that is Ferneyhough's Etudes
Transcendentales, which opens with a bar of 2/10 followed by one of
3/8.
The quaver=68 tempo indication applies to the notated quaver of the
first bar, with the 3/8 bar acquiring its slower pulse by the ratio
5:4.
The (or at least his) use of these metres is about the relationship
between them, not as a deviation away from any single norm. IMO the
alternative use of tuplets, be they partial or complete, detracts from
this.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darcy James Argue
Sent: 22 March 2008 22:48
To: finale@shsu.edu
Subject: Re: [Finale] Partial tuplets in Finale
Hi all,
I ended up blogging about this -- my post includes more extensive
instructions and visual examples. I also include audio of the
bassline
in question: two versions, with two different clicks:
http://secretsociety.typepad.com/darcy_james_argues_secret/200
8/03/till-this-bitte.html
Cheers,
- Darcy
-----
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
On 22 Mar 2008, at 1:03 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 22 Mar 2008, at 9:10 AM, shirling & neueweise wrote:
For the curious:
Finally, hide all the triplets and render the partial triplets
graphically.
in this example you would only need it on m2-3, then m1 notated
normally.
Well, mm.2-4, actually, with m.1 and m.5 notated normally, but yeah
-- only the measures with partial triplets need to be
bracketed with
whole-measure triplets.
great solution, but i don't like the fact that you can't actually
use finale's tuplets at all in your explanation. so i would add
another tuplet 2:2 on last 2 in m2 (hide number, place
manually as
expression),
Michael Gordon's notation is just a "3" below each note for partial
tuplets (no brackets), but I didn't like that so I tried to figure
out how to do incomplete tuplet brackets. I think this looks much
better. So I ended up trying exactly what you describe above, and
ran into the same problem you found with the tuplet numbers:
the space where the number should be shrinks when there is no
number, so best solution would be to use a shape expression with
white box behind the number; would have to piddle with it
to see if
best as note-attached or measure-attached... except that
GODDAMMIT
it doesn't actually work, the tuplet draws in front of the white
box grrrrrrrrrr.
"grrrrrrrrrr" indeed -- and it's probably unreasonable to expect
we'll get much love from MM on this. (That is, unless
Michael Gordon
himself wants to call up MM... but I believe he uses Sibelius.)
well, a judiciously-place text expression 3 is still very readable
in the smaller space.
Yeah -- I messed around with a few alternate solutions, but I found
that this was probably the least bad one.
you could also use a note-attached custom smart shape that might
react at least partially correct in the event of changes, but you
couldn't bracket the full duration without worrying about
having to
reposition. measure-attached custon smart shape would
work better
for full duration, but it wouldn't move vertically at all if
anything is changed.
Haven't tried either of those -- I should experiment more. Once I
got the correct playback, I got distracted trying to learn to play
this figure. It is not easy! The guy on the Icebreaker
recording of
"Trance" is pretty good, but even he scuffles a bit,
especially when
he's trying to keep it steady against all the other parts.
Cheers,
- DJA
-----
EMAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WEBSITE/BLOG: http://secretsociety.typepad.com
EPK: http://www.sonicbids.com/secretsociety
MYSPACE: http://myspace.com/darcyjamesargue
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
