Kieran, ----- Kieren MacMillan <kie...@kierenmacmillan.info> wrote: > Hi Lukas, > > > When Thomas Adès switches from 4/4 to 4/5, there is no way of knowing which > > "graphical" note length (combination of notehead style and flag count) is > > supposed to be used for the basic unit (of which 4 make up a bar, and of > > which five equal the duration of a semibreve). > > When someone writes a [numeric] time signature 4/4 — with four “naked” > quarter notes in the measure completely filling up that measure — the > performer can work out that 4 represents a quarter-note duration. Replacing > the numeric denominator "4" with a quarter-note glyph conveys exactly that > information. > > When someone writes a [numeric] time signature 2/6 — with two “naked” quarter > notes in the measure completely filling up that measure — the performer can > work out that 6 is “halfway between 4 and 8”, and thus represents a > triplet-eighth-note duration. Replacing the numeric denominator "6" with a > triplet-eighth-note glyph conveys exactly that information. >
Are you sure you mean triplet eights? I’ve played a piece by Adés with a 2/6 time signature in places and the note I would expect in the denominator would be a quarter note with a triplet bracket as the notes printed as quarters were the same value as quarter note triplets due to them being a sixth of a while note. -David > Both of these situations reflect exactly the accepted definition of time > signature: “how many beats (pulses) are contained in each measure (bar), and > which note value is equivalent to a beat”. > > Please explain the flaw in my logic, because it seems perfectly clear to me > both in my text description(s) and in that snippet I sent earlier. > > Thanks, > Kieren.
