Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > Music and Musicians Exchange
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Time signature usage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedTime signature usage

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Message
topofsm View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 17 2008
Location: Arizona, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1698
Direct Link To This Post Topic: Time signature usage
    Posted: January 27 2009 at 22:07
As a musician who can read music, I've sometimes found it a bit unusual when there are certain time signatures used instead of others on sheet music. I thought this would be a great place to discuss it.
 
I've constantly been confused on why composers use 6/8, 6/4, and 3/4 seemingly interchangeably. Yes, I can totally understand why some composers use 6/8 as sort of a swung 2/4. However, there have been several times when the piece definetely sounded like it could be in 3/4, and my conducter counted it like that. I swear it would have been so much easier for her to count out "1, 2, 3" than "1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6" over and over again. And I have seen 6/4 used, why not just write it as 3/4? 6/4 seems too long of a time signature to me.
 
Also, why do some composers use 12/8 to indicate a swung four when there's only a couple eighth notes in the passage, when a composer could easily have written 4/4 and have used a triplet eighth note in its place?
 
And this is not something that I'm confused about, but I'd thought I'd mention it. The symphony I am in has been playing the last 3 movements of the Firebird suite and the final movement includes a great section in 7/4. When I started reading it, it was a bit confusing. However, I realized that there were measures inside the measures. It turns out, inside the first measure of 7/4 there was a measure of 3/4 and then 2 of 2/4. The smaller measures were bordered by thinner lines, and each group adding up to 7/4 was surrounded by a thicker bar line. How cool is that?

Back to Top
refugee View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: November 20 2006
Location: Greece
Status: Offline
Points: 7026
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2009 at 08:07
Basically, 6/8 is 2/4 in triple time, but sometimes it can be a bit confusing:

However, care must be taken when interpreting a 6/8, or similar, time signature, as on occasion they are simple time signatures (6 quavers beats to a bar, as opposed to 2 triplet-quavers to the bar). That said, in the majority of cases, 6/8 is a 2 beat time signature. (Wikipedia)

9/8 is 3/4 in triple time, whereas 12/8 is 4/4 in triple time. All these signatures are compound time signatures, as opposed to simple time signatures.

Here’s the link to Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_signature

By the way, I wish you a happy birthday tomorrow!



He say nothing is quite what it seems;
I say nothing is nothing
(Peter Hammill)
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2009 at 09:06
As some of the guys with degrees in music theory will also tell you (when they see this thread): Most music is organized in groups of 2 or 3 beats. Of course you can break every complex signature down into such groups, and usually a 3/4 piece will have a grouping of 2-2-2, while one in 6/8 will have 3-3. Personally, in Rock music I usually listen to what bass and snare drum are playing. For example, to tell 7/8 from 7/4 you can count the bass/snare drum notes and compare the pattern to a typical rock beat where the bass drum would be on 1 and 3, and the snare on 2 and 4. As a specific and well known example, if you listen to Pink Floyd - Money, you'll notice that within one sequence of 7, the bass drum plays on 1, 3, 5 and 7, and the snare drum on 2, 4 and 6. That's much more consistent with two bars of 4/4 with the last beat ommitted, than with one bar of 4/4 with one 8th note missing.
Back to Top
triplechanger View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie


Joined: July 14 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 21
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2009 at 15:39
Also the time signature can be based around a paticular melodic figure and what sort of rhytm woud suit it more.
Gravity is a CIA plot to keep us on earth...
No way!
Yes way!
Back to Top
JLocke View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2009 at 16:29
I don't read music, but I can tell you that when I use programs on my computer to write music, I will often find myself being blocked from going further until I assign the correct time signature to the particular bar I'm working on at the time, and sometimes I will end up with something that sounds to me like it could fit a smaller time signature perfectly, but the program itself won't allow it.
 
I think it has alot to do with the note values and rhythms you're using. Sometimes 7/8 will sound better than 7/4 or 6/8 better than 3/8 simply based on the little differences I made in the note values or the rhythms.
 
Again, I can't read music, so my music theory knowledge is very limited, but . . .
Back to Top
cobb2 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 25 2007
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 415
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2009 at 19:40
It is all to do with where the stresses fall. Any time signature that has a top number divisible by 3, but larger than 3 is compound time. The rest are simple time and the stress structure is straightforward 4/4 = 4 beats of quarter note value; 7/8 = 7 beats of eighth value. So the stresses can easily be worked out. Compound time needs to be broken down to find where the stresses are. In compound time a couple of simple calculations are needed. Divide the top number by 3 to get the beats, then divide the bottom number by 2 to get the note value that equals one beat (oops forgot to add - then dot the note to make it a compound note). Example 6/8 is 2 beats of 1 dotted quarter value, which means it is stressed exactly the same as 2/4. When learning a piece in 6/8, it is much easier to count 1, &, 2, &, 3 & at three times the beat speed than to count 1, 2 and play 3 notes to each beat.

But as you pointed out above, it is really pointless to write in 6/8 unless the bulk of the notes are eighth notes.

You also have to ask yourself where did the manuscript come from (if you are talking examples of published manuscript). Did the band write it down while composing the work? Doubtful. Or did the record company contract to have this produced. If so, maybe as a prog piece, it looks better in 6/8 than 2/4. Also, as Progfreak pointed out, the drums control the rhythme, so they may well be in strict 6/8, while the rest of the instruments are less complicated.

Oh, and if your conductor was counting a strict 6/8 piece in 3/4 then the accents and stresses will come out wrong- this is bad for a conductor!


Edited by cobb2 - January 30 2009 at 19:22
Back to Top
topofsm View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 17 2008
Location: Arizona, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1698
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2009 at 01:00

Just so you guys know, I'm playing all classical music (actually, that's not true. Some of it is pops music like Phantom of the Opera and Lord of the Dance).

And I know how you're supposed to count 6/8 and 9/8 time as 2/4 and 3/4 with triplets. That's not what I'm asking.
 
I think what I'm particularly confused in is when there are sections of 6/8 which sound very triplet-y. I seem to recall "Angel of Music" from Phantom of the Opera. Now I don't know about you guys, but it doesn't sound to me like a bunch of measures of 2/4 with a triplet feel. Our conductor didn't count it as measures of 2/4 either, rather, she counted out all 6 beats. Why not just use 3/4 for songs like that?
 
And there was another time just yesterday when I was reading music and there was 4/4 through an entire section, but there were rarely any 'straight' quarter or eighth notes playing, and instead there were quarter notes and eighth notes in brackets of three, along with rests and such, making it very difficult to read. It was particularly confusing at one point when there was a measure of 2/4 thrown in, when the person could easily have notated it as 12/8 with a measure of 6/8 thrown in.
 
 
Originally posted by refugee refugee wrote:


By the way, I wish you a happy birthday tomorrow!

 
Thanks man, had a pretty good one. Good to know someone at the forum cares. I'm 17 by the way.Smile

Back to Top
cobb2 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 25 2007
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 415
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2009 at 02:52
Counting 6/8 as 3/4 changes the stresses. In 6/8 there are two beats with a stress on beat 2 on 3/4 there are 3 beats with a stress on beat 3. So if you play 6/8 as 3/4 you mess up the rhythme of the piece.

The quarter notes and eighth notes in brackets mean triplets and they are still simple time counts. 3 eighth notes in brackets means these are played to the same time that 2 eighth notes would occupy. Because of this Triplets are more difficult to play and maintain the rhythme, especially if the piece is not totally written in triplets.

But you probably already know this and I have answered the question wrong again.

Also, It is pobably a good thing for your conductor to baton it out as 6 counts (notice I don't say beats), as long as the stress is on count 4, not count 5


Edited by cobb2 - January 30 2009 at 03:08
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2009 at 05:41
Originally posted by topofsm topofsm wrote:


I think what I'm particularly confused in is when there are sections of 6/8 which sound very triplet-y. I seem to recall "Angel of Music" from Phantom of the Opera. Now I don't know about you guys, but it doesn't sound to me like a bunch of measures of 2/4 with a triplet feel. Our conductor didn't count it as measures of 2/4 either, rather, she counted out all 6 beats. Why not just use 3/4 for songs like that?


6/8 can either be 2-2-2 or 3-3. I'm not well versed on classical music notation, but why is it such a big problem whether "3/4" or "6/8" is noted in the staff? I mean, in the end you will simply look at the notes and derive the rhythmic feel from them. And about 3/4: I think that it's mainly used for Waltzes, which usually don't have a lot of syncopations on the level of 8ths going on ... essentially they can be seen as a single group of 3 beats on the level of 4th notes.

Originally posted by topofsm topofsm wrote:


 
And there was another time just yesterday when I was reading music and there was 4/4 through an entire section, but there were rarely any 'straight' quarter or eighth notes playing, and instead there were quarter notes and eighth notes in brackets of three, along with rests and such, making it very difficult to read. It was particularly confusing at one point when there was a measure of 2/4 thrown in, when the person could easily have notated it as 12/8 with a measure of 6/8 thrown in.
 


What you're describing is shuffle feel - actually there are three choices of how to write it down. The one you described is what I would call the "classical" approach. It's IMO the most suitable one if the piece is not in shuffle feel throughout. The second choice is - as you said - to make it 12/8 instead of 4/4. That way you'll still have many rests in the notation, but no more triplets. The third choice is to stick with 4/4 and to define that two 8th notes actually mean a triplet of 8ths with an implicit rest in between. This is most commonly seen in notations (or tabulatures) of Rock/Blues pieces.


Edited by Mr ProgFreak - January 30 2009 at 05:42
Back to Top
Trademark View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 21 2006
Location: oHIo
Status: Offline
Points: 1009
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2009 at 08:37
6/8 time cannot, no way, nyet, nein, never, ever, under any circumstances be 2-2-2. At the eighth note level it can only be 3-3, as it is a two beat (dotted quarter note gets the beat) measure with triple subdivision of the beat.  It is notated as 6/8 to avoid confusion with 2/4 which also has two quarter note beats but where those beats are sub-divided in twos rather than in threes.  6/8 is a compound meter, (which has a strict definition, look it up if you need to) and as such always, always, always, always has a subdivision of the main beat grouping (in this case a dotted quarter note) into 3.  

2-2-2 (assuming the "2's" are eighth notes) would have to be notated as 3/4 to avoid confusion on the part of the player.  You can have triplets in this meter, but they will not be the rule, they will be the exception.  likewise, you might occasionally see a "duplet" marking (sort of the opposite of a triplet where you play 2 notes in the usual space of three) in any compound meter but these will not be the rule and are used for a special effect called hemiola.  Onward by Yes is in 6/8 compound meter.  Chuck Berry's Maybelline is in 2/4  Elvis Costello's American Without Tears is in 3/4.  You couldn't mistake one for the other. 

There are instances of six beat groupings which are broken down in groupings of 4+2 (or 2+4) and this might be what toposfm is seeing/playing in the example he mentions.  Meters like these are called "additive meters" and until fairly recently (the past 20 years or so) were mostly notated with meter sigs like 6/8, 9/8 etc.  The way these meters are taught now they would have a meter signature like 4+2/8 or 2+4/8 etc. 

The reason for the change is to help facilitate sight-reading.  When a player sees 6/8, 9/8 etc. he automatically thinks of the compound beat subdivision and tries to play the music in that manner.  If the composer really wanted 4+2, the results are predictably bad until the player realizes what the composer really wanted.  The new method of indicating additive meter reduces the stress on the player in these cases.

Take the ever-discussed "Apocalypse in 9/8 as an example.  Genesis indicate that this section is in 9/8 but any player looking at it would have a hard time playing it.  They'll be groping around for the three dotted quarter beats and the triple subdivisions and would not find them.  It can be" learned" that the piece is actually divided into groupings of 3+2+4/8 but not without stopping and investigating the full score (an individual player in a group cannot make such a judgement by looking at only his own part), but this is not a practical use of rehearsal time.

These are notation issues that really only affect those who write music for those who play from the written music.  Largely improvised or music memorized from jamming (like most prog) don't have the same issues because rehearsal time is structured very differently and in most cases is nearly unlimited.  A professional orchestra, on the other hand, will usually have only 4-6 hours rehearsal for a performance of a 2 hour concert.  If there are notational issues such as the 9/8 thing I mentioned, their rehearsal time is wasted sorting out problems that the composer could have avoided by correctly notating that section as 3+2+4/8.
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2009 at 09:24
^ I'm pretty sure that I could note a 2-2-2 pattern in 6/8 ... Tongue

Of course I "catch your drift" ... it's a well established convention to note it as 3/4, and especially in classical music you simply would not even think of using 6/8.
Back to Top
topofsm View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 17 2008
Location: Arizona, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1698
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2009 at 18:32
I think a measure of 6/8 could be 2-2-2, if used correctly. An example that rises to the top of my head is in "America" from West Side Story, when some character was singing something like "I want to live in America". The accents in that song are on: I, live, Mer, Ri, Ca. The accent pattern looks something like this.
 
A - - A - - | A - A - A - | A - - A - - | A - A - A
 
So that there are alternating measures of 3-3 and 2-2-2. I think it works well.
 
Either way, the sections I'm talking about are definetely not 2-4. If anything, each measure sounds like two completely separate measures of 3/4. The measures in 6/8 sure don't sound like waltz time, which is 3/4, but it doesn't sound like, say, the singing sections of SOYCD, which have a triplet feel but are two groups of three that go together. I guess part of my confusion is why make a distinction between 3/4 and 6/8.
 
As far as I know, 6/8 that's not meant to sound like a triplet 2/4 sounds like a couple groups of 3, and usually the chord progression doesn't change between measures. Like "Oh! Darling" by The Beatles. When I listen to it, in my mind I hear 1-2-3-1-2-3-1-2-3 over and over, yet I know that it's 6/8 because the snare hits on the 4th beat of the measure. Not only that, but the chord stays the same for six of those counts, and changes every 6 counts. When I get confused is when I play something like the one I mentioned, "Angel of Music", where there is no rock/pop percussion behind the melody to let me know where the accents are going to fall. Listening to it, it sounds like there are separate groups of 3 over and over again. The strange thing is, the chord seems to change every 3 counts, not every 6 counts. It's not a problem sightreading it, because I recognize 6/8 as a triplet measure. I'm just curious as to why choose between the two.
 
There's another time signature conundrum that i just thought of right now. At my regional band concert, our band played a piece where there was a particularly complicated section. There were plenty of time changes between 6/8, 2/4, 9/8, and 7/4. However, the main part of the piece was repeated alternating measures of 6/8 and 2/4, so the accent pattern looked like this:
 
A - - A - - | A - A - | A - - A - - | A - A - |
 
If you listen to it, the two measures sound like the standard rhythm pattern for many pentuple rhythms. Tons of 5/4 music has that accent pattern. So why make the distinction between alternating 6/8 with 2/4 or simply doing a few measures of 5/4?

Back to Top
cobb2 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 25 2007
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 415
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2009 at 20:08
It usually makes sense to write this grouping pattern of 1 measure 6/8 and one measure 2/4 repeat, to keep the main and secondary accents of the piece more abvious when written as manuscript. Also remember that main and secondary stresses in meter are not the same as placing an accent on the music, which is a straighforward play this note louder indication. Metric stress just means that it is set off in some way within the music. Perhaps where your ambiguity is coming from, is the fact that you see one section of the whole, as you are only playing one part of the orchestration. As a classical guitar player, there are loads of examples of compound time, but I see them written for one instrument and most have the same bass note structure- say in 6/8 these will normally fall on count 1 and count 4 (or beat 1 and beat 2) and it is these bass notes which are giving the metric stress. So as in your example above of your 6/8 2/4 repeat, even if you count it  and play it as 5/4, the bass structure will probably set the metric accents as 6/8 2/4, because more than likely the bass will fall on beat 1 and 2 for both the compound time measure and the simple time measure. In 5/4 the bass would normally fall on beat 1 and 4 (this is totally simplified).

5/4 all written in quarters would look like MA - - SA -
6/8 | 2/4  all written in eighth would look like MA - - SA - - | MA - SA -
MA=main accent, SA=secondary accent.

A lot more metric stresses (remember these are happenings in the music with some form of change in harmony, melodic shift or phrase break) in the 6/8 | 2/4 than in the 5/4. Writing a 6/8 | 2/4 pattern as 5/4 would make it far more complicated to understand because the 5/4 pattern simplifies it too much.


Edited by cobb2 - January 30 2009 at 20:12
Back to Top
JLocke View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 31 2009 at 22:37
My novice musical head hurts . . . Angry
Back to Top
topofsm View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 17 2008
Location: Arizona, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1698
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 01 2009 at 00:53
Hmm, maybe I'm just not getting the concept of stress in meters. I think mainly my confusion is the result of a lack of music theory.
 
Is most time signature choice just to make the person sightreading comprehend what the feel of the piece is, rather than how the piece is going to sound? After all, a good musician should have played either the 6/8 2/4 or the 5/4 exactly the same if the dynamics, note durations, and rests were all the same, just being in a different meter.

Back to Top
cobb2 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 25 2007
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 415
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 01 2009 at 04:16
Yes, you could write it in 5/4 using triplets where the 6/8 section is, but then anyone reading it would get confused. Musicians would wonder why the piece wasn't simplified into a 6/8 | 2/4 pattern so the meter sat correctly and the less competant may change the ryhthmic structure altogether by giving it a 1 and 4 stress. Also writing it as 5/4 would mean the piece would get confused as being syncopated because the underlying musical stresses are falling in strange places.

So, in effect it is written in 6/8 | 2/4 because this is what it is- two repeating measure both with two beats, both taking the same time to complete two measure, but  the first measure has a series of quicker notes than the second measure. Changing it to 5/4 would make no sense. However it could be changed to two measures of 2/4 and use triplets in the first measure. In this way, no harm is done to the rhthmic structure.


Edited by cobb2 - February 01 2009 at 04:22
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 01 2009 at 04:58
Originally posted by topofsm topofsm wrote:

Hmm, maybe I'm just not getting the concept of stress in meters. I think mainly my confusion is the result of a lack of music theory.
 
Is most time signature choice just to make the person sightreading comprehend what the feel of the piece is, rather than how the piece is going to sound? After all, a good musician should have played either the 6/8 2/4 or the 5/4 exactly the same if the dynamics, note durations, and rests were all the same, just being in a different meter.


I think that signature/notation choices should be made to optimize readability/simplicity.
Back to Top
topofsm View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 17 2008
Location: Arizona, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1698
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 01 2009 at 18:20
Here is a clip of the piece, called "Flight of Valor", in case you wanted to hear it. The section I've been talking about begins at about 1:53.
 
Now it seems to me that the accent and stress pattern sounds a lot like the Mission Impossible theme, which is a piece famous for being in 5/4. I have played the MI theme for a pops concert before, and it was in 5/4, and my conductor counted out every count in the meters, going to five and then starting over.
 
However, I do see a definite advantage to notating it in 6/8 and 2/4. It makes conducting it a lot easier. Still it doesn't really explain my confusion.

Back to Top
The Pessimist View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: June 13 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 3834
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 01 2009 at 19:09
Well Bach used the bottom number as an indication to how fast a piece should be (6/8 is faster than 6/4), and composers still use that method today. But it all depends on the tuplet divisions and the length of phrases. If you have a phrase that lasts for two measures of 6/16, then you may as well put the entire thing as 12/16. If a song is in 4/4 but is almost completely dominated by triplets, then you may as well put it as 12/8 and speed up the quaver.
"Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value."

Arnold Schoenberg
Back to Top
cobb2 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 25 2007
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 415
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 01 2009 at 20:00
I have looked at the manuscript (if this is the James Swearingen piece you are talking about) and those sections in 6/8 are written with the classic compound pattern of two groups of three eighths in the melody and two bass notes falling on beats 1 and 2 (or counts 1 and 4). The grouping of the eighth tails into 2 groups of three is important because this actually tells you that it is in 6/8- two beats each with three eighth notes. From the manuscript I cannot see any way that this could be confused with 5/4, although it could be misinterpreted as all in 2/4, without seeing the manuscript. 

If you only have the manuscript for your particular instrument go here to view the whole orchestration:
Go to page 6.

If you already have the full orchestration don't worry about it.


Edited by cobb2 - February 01 2009 at 20:18
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.