Re: 5027: NR example with bad engraving practice

[Hans Aikema]

> On 5 Jan 2017, at 23:55, Simon Albrecht <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> On 05.01.2017 23:42, Hans Aikema wrote:
>>> On 5 Jan 2017, at 23:16, Simon Albrecht <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>> On 04.01.2017 15:01, Hans Åberg wrote:
>>>>>> This is just a quirk of the 4/4 [meter], also mentioned in Hindemith, 
>>>>>> "Elementary Training", p. 30. In other words, the note should not cross 
>>>>>> the 2nd and 4th metric accents, but it can cross the [3rd].
>>> I’ve never heard of that and would assume it is a peculiarity in Hindemith. 
>>> Can anyone cite Gould or similar on the topic?
>>> 
>>> Best, Simon
>> Have Gould at hand, but I think it depends on interpretation of Gould p171 
>> in the section on Syncopation
>> 
>> <quote>
>> The following common patterns are exceptions and should always be written as 
>> follows
>> </quote>
>> 
>> description of the image that follows for 4/4 time:
>> crotchet minim crotchet  and not crotchet crotchet tie crotchet crotchet
>> 
>> does that hold for ‘minim in the middle of the measure’ or just for an exact 
>> crotchet minim crotchet measure?
> 
> We are not talking about a simple syncopated rhythm like the one Gould lists 
> as an exception (!). Of course it’s perfectly normal to write 4 2 4 in 4/4 
> time.
> But if the note has to be split with a tie anyway, then it should be split 
> along the center of the measure first, unlike the NR hitherto did.
> 8 4.~ 4 4
> not
> 8 8~ 2 4
> 
> Best, Simon

How I read p171 is that those are common patterns that are NOT syncopated but 
appear to be, as it follows the following snippet of text on Syncopation:

Rhythms that should not be syncopated must divide note-values to expose the 
beats of the bar:

4/4 time 4. 4 8 4 | will be accentuated as 3 + 3+ 2 quavers : 8/8 4.-> 4-> 8 
4-> |

unless written 4/4 4. 8~8 8 4 |

The following common patterns……..