Does everyone erm ....know their time signatures?

[Dad3353]

There is much music written that has varying emphasis within the composition, all encompassed by a common time signature. I would not expect the TS [i]alone [/i]to give all the information required; that's the job of the notes and annotations within the piece. That the TS give a reasonable idea of how the piece should be approached would be enough, I feel. Sometimes even the annotations are not sufficient, either, and the final 'feel' is given by the conductor or band leader. This is not necessarily a Bad Thing, and can, indeed, be intentional on the part of the composer. All is not to be interpreted as literally as seems to be the impression given here, imo. A TS will not [i]always [/i]be 'counted out' in the same way throughout the work (although most often it will be, indeed...).

[charic]

I have little to contribute other than to say I've got a riff that I wrote in 19/16

[toneknob]

[quote name='EliasMooseblaster' timestamp='1397048427' post='2420094']
As someone else said in one of the related threads (and possibly here as well) these "rules" are more like widely-followed guidelines than scientific laws. Depending on whose transcript you pick up, for example, I've seen Pink Floyd's [i]Money [/i]written out in both 7/4 and in 4+3 / 4.

(Somebody told me this was because conventionally, 7/4 is emphasised as 3+4 / 4. I don't know whether I believe this person, particularly because I didn't think there was enough music written in 7/4 for there to be a broad "convention" on the matter!)
[/quote]

There's no more a convention for 7/4 to be treated as a 3+4 or a 4+3 than 4/4 has a convention to be 2+2 or 1+3 or 3+1. It's 7/4 because there are seven quarter-note beats that repeat. Same goes for 9/8, 13/4 etc.

[Lord Sausage]

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1397050061' post='2420119']
There is much music written that has varying emphasis within the composition, all encompassed by a common time signature. I would not expect the TS [i]alone [/i]to give all the information required; that's the job of the notes and annotations within the piece. That the TS give a reasonable idea of how the piece should be approached would be enough, I feel. Sometimes even the annotations are not sufficient, either, and the final 'feel' is given by the conductor or band leader. This is not necessarily a Bad Thing, and can, indeed, be intentional on the part of the composer. All is not to be interpreted as literally as seems to be the impression given here, imo. A TS will not [i]always [/i]be 'counted out' in the same way throughout the work (although most often it will be, indeed...).
[/quote]

Exactly!

[Annoying Twit]

[quote name='Lord Sausage' timestamp='1397045349' post='2420020']
I've just dug some music out, printed official by music publishers etc where i know there are parts containing bars of 9/8 that isn't compound. It's notated as 9/8. I think you should get on the phone to 'em and Portnoy.

I ain't saying it's not compound, I'm saying it doesn't have to be and that it doesn't always get used as that. I've done plenty of reading gigs where it isn't. It's like language. things and meanings can change over time in English, why not music.

Plus it's not that big a deal. I bet loads of musicians think of 9/8 in compound and simple. It's not a problem. Why do you need it to be just compound?
[/quote]

I don't have a "need" for 9/8 to be compound, it's just that I believe that it's correct to say that 9/8 is compound. And that when it's used for other types of time signature, that's an error.

As you and others have pointed out, it isn't rare for 9/8 to be used to describe non-compound time signatures. But, that doesn't mean that this usage is correct. E.g. it's very common for people to write "your" when they should write "you're", but this doesn't make it correct. It's common for people to calculate "3 + 4 x 7" and come up with the answer 49, instead of 31, but that doesn't make it right. Nor does it mean that I have a "need" for "3 + 4 x 7" to equal 31, it's simply the correct answer. Just because people do things, that doesn't mean that they're correct.

Sure, it's easy to come up with examples (as I did) where people use 9/8 for a time signature that isn't compound, but this doesn't make it correct. (After all, it was me that posted the Portney youtube video.)

Edited April 9, 2014 by Annoying Twit

[toneknob]

[quote name='Annoying Twit' timestamp='1397053938' post='2420177']
E.g. it's very common for people to write "your" when they should write "you're", but this doesn't make it correct.

...(After all, it was me that posted the Portney youtube video.)
[/quote]

It's "Portnoy" actually

[Annoying Twit]

[quote name='toneknob' timestamp='1397054156' post='2420182']
It's "Portnoy" actually
[/quote]

I just searched on 'Dream Theatre "Mike Portney"' and found 10,700 results. Doesn't that mean that it must be a correct spelling of his name since there are many examples of it being spelled that way?

[toneknob]

[quote name='Annoying Twit' timestamp='1397054369' post='2420184']
I just searched on 'Dream Theatre "Mike Portney"' and found 10,700 results. Doesn't that mean that it must be a correct spelling of his name since there are many examples of it being spelled that way?
[/quote]

er, no actually (and it's "Theater" )

[Annoying Twit]

[quote name='toneknob' timestamp='1397055085' post='2420199']
er, no actually (and it's "Theater" )
[/quote]

That was deliberate! The misspelling of Portnoy in my previous sizeable post was an accident. But, as it became an example of what I was talking about, I misspelled both the band and the drummer in the google search.

Edited April 9, 2014 by Annoying Twit

[toneknob]

Haha. Of course.

[Left Foot]

all to confusing, so I count in bums and tits

[Dad3353]

[quote name='Left Foot' timestamp='1397059128' post='2420258']
all to confusing, so I count in bums and tits
[/quote]

Err... It's 'too', actually. (... [i]but I agree about the counting[/i]...)

[toneknob]

[quote name='Left Foot' timestamp='1397059128' post='2420258']
all to confusing, so I count in bums and tits
[/quote]

*insert inappropriate clip from Total Recall here*

[chaypup]

[quote name='Lord Sausage' timestamp='1396972214' post='2419299']
I may be wrong as it's been a long time, 17 yrs, but I'm sure i played America from West side story and it was written bar of 6/8 bar of 3/4. Not some crazy time.
[/quote]

Correct - it is in an alternating meter.

[miles'tone]

[quote name='Phil Adams' timestamp='1396858569' post='2417901']
With acknowledgment to the scales thread.
Obviously some are easy, 4/4, 3/3 etc.
Or do we just follow the sticksman and hope he's right?
[/quote]

If I may go back to the op for a moment..

A lot of emphasis has been made in this thread on how to write and read different time signatures. But it's not the be all and end all.

Just out of interest, how does everyone get on if someone calls a jam to improvise in say 7/4 or 9/8? How are you counting then? Or do you stop thinking about it and just feel the flow?
Jamming in "odd" time signatures is where all the fun is for me personally.

[skej21]

[quote name='chaypup' timestamp='1397068972' post='2420393']


Correct - it is in an alternating meter.
[/quote]

Actually it's not quite correct :-)

It's a hemiola and they are not the same thing. An alternating meter would be written as 3/4 followed by 6/8 (or visa versa) but that is not the case with 'America'. That particular piece features a hemiola and is written as a continuous meter of 6/8 but the accent of the beat changes so that it SOUNDS like two meters when it's not. It's actually a very specific musical device where three beats are placed into the space of the two that SHOULD fall within a compound time signature.

Two sets of three quavers (or two dotted crochets) followed by a crochet, two tied quavers, and a final crochet (changing the two dotted crochets into three crochet sounds through accenting changes).

The accents lie like this;
(ONE, two, three, TWO, two, three, ONE [two], THREE [one], TWO [three])

In reality it would be counted as:
(ONE, two, three, TWO, two, three, ONE [two], ONE [two], ONE [two])

Apologies if that got a bit too music theory geeky for anyone!

Edited April 9, 2014 by skej21

[Lord Sausage]

[quote name='skej21' timestamp='1397073407' post='2420470']
Actually it's not quite correct :-)

It's a hemiola and they are not the same thing. An alternating meter would be written as 3/4 followed by 6/8 (or visa versa) but that is not the case with 'America'. That particular piece features a hemiola and is written as a continuous meter of 6/8 but the accent of the beat changes so that it SOUNDS like two meters when it's not. It's actually a very specific musical device where three beats are placed into the space of the two that SHOULD fall within a compound time signature.

Two sets of three quavers (or two dotted crochets) followed by a crochet, two tied quavers, and a final crochet (changing the two dotted crochets into three crochet sounds through accenting changes).

The accents lie like this;
(ONE, two, three, TWO, two, three, ONE [two], THREE [one], TWO [three])

In reality it would be counted as:
(ONE, two, three, TWO, two, three, ONE [two], ONE [two], ONE [two])

Apologies if that got a bit too music theory geeky for anyone!
[/quote]

Wiki disagrees. To be honest i did too as i was sure hemiola rhythms were played at the same time. We did some latin percussion lessons at college. i couldn't quite remember as i smoked a lot of weed since then ha ha. Plus as i said when i played song from west Side Story at a theatre gig i'm sure the score was written alternating.

Obviously wiki isn't definite proof, neither is someone with a weed addled memory. But it seems correct.

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_(West_Side_Story_song"]http://en.wikipedia....Side_Story_song[/url])

[color=#252525]From a technical standpoint, the alternating of 3/4 (three quarter notes) with 6/8 (two groups of three eighth-notes), while the value of the eight-note remains constant, is a distinctive characteristic of the song. This rhythm has been called both a [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemiola"]hemiola[/url] and a [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habanera_(music)"]habanera[/url], although it is not really either. The "two" and "three" bars alternate, but they are not superposed, as in a hemiola. The alternating two and three is similar to the aria "[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habanera_(aria)"]Habanera[/url]" from [i][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmen"]Carmen[/url][/i], but "America" lacks the distinctive characteristic underlying rhythm of the habanera form. The composer's tempo instruction is "Tempo di [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huapango"]Huapango[/url]"[/color]

Edited April 10, 2014 by Lord Sausage

[skej21]

[quote name='Lord Sausage' timestamp='1397155661' post='2421312']


Wiki disagrees. To be honest i did too as i was sure hemiola rhythms were played at the same time. We did some latin percussion lessons at college. i couldn't quite remember as i smoked a lot of weed since then ha ha. Plus as i said when i played song from west Side Story at a theatre gig i'm sure the score was written alternating.

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_(West_Side_Story_song"]http://en.wikipedia....Side_Story_song[/url])

[color=#252525]From a technical standpoint, the alternating of 3/4 (three quarter notes) with 6/8 (two groups of three eighth-notes), while the value of the eight-note remains constant, is a distinctive characteristic of the song. This rhythm has been called both a [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemiola"]hemiola[/url] and a [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habanera_(music)"]habanera[/url], although it is not really either. The "two" and "three" bars alternate, but they are not superposed, as in a hemiola. The alternating two and three is similar to the aria "[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habanera_(aria)"]Habanera[/url]" from [i][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmen"]Carmen[/url][/i], but "America" lacks the distinctive characteristic underlying rhythm of the habanera form. The composer's tempo instruction is "Tempo di [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huapango"]Huapango[/url]"[/color]
[/quote]

Hmm. I distrust Wikipedia as a source as it's often not perfect. Also, Huapango is described on there as a fast 6/8 dance, so backs up the idea of a continuous time signature that doesn't alternate (ie 6/8 then 3/4 then 6/8 then 3/4 etc) and counteracts your argument.

Also, your idea that it's not a hemiola because it's not superposed refers only to a vertical hemiola (where the two rhythms happen at the same time). If you look into 'horizontal hemiola' you'll find that it's the exact rhythmic idea used in 'America' (2 dotted crochets followed by 3 crochets or visa versa).

Maybe 'metric modulation' is a more accurate description for this device but in this case it is a horizontal hemiola.

Edited April 10, 2014 by skej21

[Lord Sausage]

You say Hemiola, I say potato!

i ain't arguing pal. I said this if you remember.

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Obviously wiki isn't definite proof, neither is someone with a weed addled memory. [/font][/color][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]But it seems correct.[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Why is everything so formal, it's just a discussion [/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]It's just I've played it off a score where it's mixed meter. In the end though it doesn't matter. As long as you are getting the 6 then 3 feel it don't matter the rest is just semantics. Music is passion not academia![/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif] [/font][/color][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]I apologise if this comes over as arsey, it's not supposed to....it's just sometimes i do. [/font][/color]

[skej21]

[quote name='Lord Sausage' timestamp='1397158063' post='2421350']
You say Hemiola, I say potato!

i ain't arguing pal. I said this if you remember.

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Obviously wiki isn't definite proof, neither is someone with a weed addled memory. [/font][/color][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]But it seems correct.[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Why is everything so formal, it's just a discussion [/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]It's just I've played it off a score where it's mixed meter. In the end though it doesn't matter. As long as you are getting the 6 then 3 feel it don't matter the rest is just semantics. Music is passion not academia![/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif] [/font][/color][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]I apologise if this comes over as arsey, it's not supposed to....it's just sometimes i do. [/font][/color]
[/quote]

Ditto. The only reason it was formal was to be clear! Either way, music theory is FUN :-)

[Lord Sausage]

[quote name='skej21' timestamp='1397158355' post='2421352']
Ditto. The only reason it was formal was to be clear! Either way, music theory is FUN :-)
[/quote]Word!

[Mr Anthony]

In my band, it's rarely anything other than 4/4.

When composing more classical or film music, I've been so crazy as to use 13/8, which was fun.