| Author
|
One for the Theory heads !!
|
Soundmagus
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
67
Posts :
633
Posted : Feb 19, 2009 20:54:06
|
I am currently reading a book called "Music Theory for Computer Musicians".
I have been reading quite happily but now i have arrived at a section where i dont quite understand how they get the "numbers" they get and i was hoping one of you folks with better theory knowledge than I could explain, so here it is...
Its regarding Time Signatures and Metric Cycles, the book states : "The simplest metric pattern is a grouping of beats into twos (Duple Time)"
NOW would this be writtien 2/2 or is it 2/4 or am i completely wrong?
This however, is not really what puzzled me, the real puzzler is this, the book states "When each beat of a simple time signature (duple, triple & quadruple) is sub divided into 3, the equivalent COMPOUND time signature is obtained. Compound Duple time = 6/8 - thus has 6 beats".
Now i understand where the 6 comes from, each beat split into 3, so 2x3 = 6......but where in hell does the 8 come from?
I have obviously misunderstood something but i am not sure what and until i understand this i dont want to move on reading, hopefulyl someone can explain this to me in plain english.
many thanks,
Mark
  Check out my site for Video tutorials and other tips & Tricks
http://www.music-production-videos.com |
|
|
|
shellbound
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
14
Posts :
601
Posted : Feb 19, 2009 21:02
|
|
i wouldn't worry about this too much. this is more important if you were notating a piece of music in sheet music. one can be chosen over the other for ease of transcription or readability. however, as far as what you actually hear, it should be the same. i remember an argument about this on kvr a while ago. maybe i can try to dig that thread up. |
|
|
|
Soundmagus
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
67
Posts :
633
Posted : Feb 19, 2009 21:05
|
thanks septa,
I am not really worried about the sheet music.scoring side but as i look at music mathematically i need to understand where this calculation comes from or i cant move on, it will drive me crazy, stupid i know but i like to understand these things before i continue reading more stuff i dont yet understand.
thanks
Mark
Check out my site for Video tutorials and other tips & Tricks
http://www.music-production-videos.com |
|
|
|
shellbound
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
14
Posts :
601
Posted : Feb 19, 2009 21:06
|
|
master bud
Started Topics :
6
Posts :
144
Posted : Feb 19, 2009 21:07
|
+1 septa
Use 4/4 then experiment with those exotic ones later. 99% of ur music is 4/4.
Making what you want with what you have |
|
|
|
Soundmagus
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
67
Posts :
633
Posted : Feb 19, 2009 21:11
|
hi guys,
I understand music theory to a point, its not about using these, i just simply want to understand how they get from 2/2 to 6/8 by subdividing by 3? thats all, its not about me making music like this etc, i just want to understand how the calculation is done a si dont see how subdividing 2/2 gets to 6/8 
Thanks for the link i will read that thread 
Mark
Check out my site for Video tutorials and other tips & Tricks
http://www.music-production-videos.com |
|
|
|
Soundmagus
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
67
Posts :
633
Posted : Feb 19, 2009 21:19
|
jesus !!
that thread is intense, i think i will wait for someone to explain the maths here, that thread scares me lool
Mark
Check out my site for Video tutorials and other tips & Tricks
http://www.music-production-videos.com |
|
|
|
shellbound
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
14
Posts :
601
Posted : Feb 19, 2009 21:28
|
hahahhaa.... yeah, i started re-reading it and gave up by the 2nd page. i still stand by my understanding. i think it's kinda like the difference between working with 16th @ 140 bpm or working with 8th @ 240.
it all depends if the triplet feel is the exception (something that happens just a few times in the piece) vs. the whole piece being like that with an occasional "straight" sections. |
|
|
|
Soundmagus
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
67
Posts :
633
Posted : Feb 19, 2009 21:37
|
yeah scary shit, but i am not really interested in what the time signatures mean or do, i just want to know how 2/2 when subdivided by 3 to get the compound time signature 6/8 is done.
Where does the 8 came from?
I understand it means that instead of 2 beats with 2 half notes (2/2 i think) becomes 6 beats with 8th notes but how do they get the 8?? i see how they get the 6 but not the 8, its driving me nuts lool
Mark
Check out my site for Video tutorials and other tips & Tricks
http://www.music-production-videos.com |
|
|
|
Soundmagus
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
67
Posts :
633
Posted : Feb 19, 2009 21:54
|
|
shellbound
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
14
Posts :
601
Posted : Feb 19, 2009 22:01
|
i think the confusion comes from the difference between what the simple and compound time actually represent (and there's a difference).
from the Wiki:
--------------
Compound time signatures
In compound time signatures, the main beat is divided into three equal parts (as distinct from the two equal parts in simple time). Compound time signatures are distinguished by an upper number which is commonly 6, 9 or 12. The most common lower number in a compound time signature is 8, meaning the time is beaten in eighth notes (quavers).
Unlike simple time, however, compound time uses a dotted note for the beat unit. Consequently, since it is impossible to indicate a dotted note by using a single, non-fractional number, the upper and lower numbers in compound time signatures do not represent the number of beats per bar and the beat unit, as they do in simple time.
The upper and lower numbers in compound time signatures are determined as follows:
* To determine the number of beats per bar, divide the upper number by three. For example, in 6/8, there are 2 beats per measure. The pulse in a compound 6/8 will have two dotted quarter-note (crotchet) beats, and each beat will subdivide into a group of three eighth notes.
* To identify the "beat unit" (i.e. which type of note represents one beat), multiply the note value represented by the lower number by three. In 6/8, the lower number (8) represents the note value of an eighth note. Multiplying that note value by three gives a unit of a dotted quarter note, or 3 eighth notes.
----------------- |
|
|
|
Soundmagus
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
67
Posts :
633
Posted : Feb 19, 2009 22:16
|
Ok that explains some of it better but it still doesnt explain why the 8 is used and the maths dont fit with the explanation.
* To determine the number of beats per bar, divide the upper number by three. For example, in 6/8, there are 2 beats per measure. The pulse in a compound 6/8 will have two dotted quarter-note (crotchet) beats, and each beat will subdivide into a group of three eighth notes.
So if we are working with 2/4 using the above info you would subdivide the upper number by 3, which gives us 6 (each beat of the 2 divided into 3s)
To identify the "beat unit" (i.e. which type of note represents one beat), multiply the note value represented by the lower number by three. In 6/8, the lower number (8) represents the note value of an eighth note. Multiplying that note value by three gives a unit of a dotted quarter note, or 3 eighth notes.
The above says to identify the beat unit multiply the note value represented by the lower number by 3, so this would be 4x3 = 12 !!
And it also says "The most common lower number in a compound time signature is 8, meaning the time is beaten in eighth notes (quavers). " but it doesnt explain WHY the most common number is 8!!!
You know what, F'## IT i obviously dont understand enough theory to get this, the maths doesnt make sense to me lol
Check out my site for Video tutorials and other tips & Tricks
http://www.music-production-videos.com |
|
|
|
shellbound
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
14
Posts :
601
Posted : Feb 19, 2009 22:45
|
but, again, you are missing the point: what those number represent is different depending on if it's simple or compound time. so if you are working with 2/4, you can't do those calculations. with 2/4 it simply means you have 2 quarter notes per beat.
those calculations are only for when you are working with compound time: 6/8, 9/8, 12/8.
it doesn't add up because you are treating them like they are the same. what 2 and 4 represent in 2/4 is different from what 6 and 8 represent in 6/8.
about the WHY, i think you are looking at it backwards. the music came first and after people started trying to figure out the easiest way to notate it. what you see is the result of that and just some convention that people agreed on. it doesn't really matter what the convention is, as long as it's agreed upon. |
|
|
|
Soundmagus
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
67
Posts :
633
Posted : Feb 19, 2009 23:11
|
hmm i am lost TBH.
The book and the passages above clearly state that to convert from 2/4 simple to 6/8 compound you divide by 3.
The divide by 3 is right, you get the 6, but it doesnt work for the 4.
I know i am misunderstanding something and the only thing i can think of is that /8 just means compound and the calculation should only be done on the top number, maybe once i learn more basic theory i will get it and maybe i am lookin gat it too mathematically or misreading something somewhere.
I didnt see the bottom of your post, so i am right then, the /8 is a conventoin which dictates compound, like the midi convention, somethign agreed upon to mean 1 specific thing throughout, so there is no maths applied to the bottom number, if its compound it will have /8 !
:O
MArk
Check out my site for Video tutorials and other tips & Tricks
http://www.music-production-videos.com |
|
|
|
Axis Mundi
Axis Mundi
Started Topics :
75
Posts :
1848
Posted : Feb 19, 2009 23:12
|
2/4 sounds twice as fast as 4/4 if both signatures were played at the same tempo.
2/4 is two beats to a bar.
3/4 is three beats, 4/4 is four beats to a bar.
You hear 3/4 often in blues music, an example of which is when you hear three hihats (which fall on beats) before the snare hit.
edit: Actually Septa explained it a lot better.
|
|
|
|
