[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Complex time signature
From: |
Arle Lommel |
Subject: |
Re: Complex time signature |
Date: |
Fri, 14 Jan 2011 15:57:48 -0500 |
> Somebody in this list used the notation of writing just the number in the
> staff, and the '+' decomposition above it and the staff within parenthesis in
> smaller size. That seems me to be a good idea. The '+' is not needed if the
> decomposition can be seen from the beaming.
Seems like a good way to approach it. I prefer the format I use in some work
I've, but primarily because I was writing pieces with shifting polymetrics and
preferred to make everything rather obvious. But the idea you mention does seem
appropriate where the emphasis in the score is not on the rhythm and something
more discreet is desired.
-Arle
- Re: Complex time signature, (continued)
- RE: Complex time signature, James Lowe, 2011/01/14
- Re: Complex time signature, Arle Lommel, 2011/01/14
- Re:Complex time signature, Arle Lommel, 2011/01/14
- Re: Complex time signature, Reinhold Kainhofer, 2011/01/14
- Re: Complex time signature, Reinhold Kainhofer, 2011/01/14
- Re: Complex time signature, Patrick Horgan, 2011/01/15
Re: Complex time signature, Arle Lommel, 2011/01/14