> > And I'm *still* not sure I grok what's going on in your Ferneyhough > example. Let me try again: > > You've got two notes of equal length in the 2/10 bar -- never mind > what to call them. Each note gets one beat. The tempo > indication says > e=68. Does the tempo indication mean *these* two notes in the first > bar are played at 68 BPM?
Yes > > And the next bar -- my understanding is that the three notes in this > bar are all 4/5ths as long as the notes in the preceding measure, > right? So is the tempo for this bar is 54.4 BPM? Or does the e=68 in > the *first* bar mean the eighth notes in the *second* bar are all 68 > BPM -- and therefore the two notes in the *first* bar are 85 BPM? > The former (you mean 5/4th?), in performance terms one should feel an elongation of the pulse by a specific ratio rather than concerning oneself with a particular calculation for a metronome marking. This is particularly important for being able to make sense of passages where there may be a long gradual rall. or accel. across several bars, including such changes in the pulse. > > So what is the test to determine whether you can, in fact, hear an > interval or a rhythm in your head? Whether you can write it > down? That > can't be it -- lots of singers can't accurately transcribe the > intervals they sing. Art Blakey could have played you (accurately!) > rhythms he'd have found impossible to notate. > > Cheers, > > - Darcy > But is a 'test' what we really want or what is needed? That's getting a little distracted from the point at hand, the music itself, and trivialising it into some kind of game. Owain _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
