16 Dec
2002
16 Dec
'02
10:43 p.m.
On Tuesday 17 December 2002 03.11, Tim Goetze wrote:
David Olofson wrote:
In that case yes - but with longer bars, I'd try to find a reference
in between my notes. Let's take Paul's nice example. To play the 9
1/2 part, I'd really rather not count to 19, but to 9 - and then I'd
expect the next bar to start *in between* my 9 and 10; on the "and",
that is.
On Monday 16 December 2002 23.08, Tim Goetze
wrote:
thanks for asking.
1) it is simply not the way counting time as a musician works.
if your measure said 3.5 / 2, you'd count 7 quarters. Paul Davis wrote:
Can you expand on that? >i'd be happy to hear a good example
proving this wrong. but
>take note that i don't accept 1/2, 1/3 and relatives as
>qualifying because they can better be (and usually are)
>expressed using integer numbers.
[long reasonings elided]
alright, have your way then if you need all the complication
for so little to gain, and if your scheme gets the votes. actually and mathematically proving this unfortunately
is
beyond me, you have to try it yourself.
Well, why don't we ask someone who actually plays this kind of music
seriously? I can only tell you how *I* count when dealing with
complex rhythms - and I don't do it all that often. (I've done 5 + 4
beats per bar and that sort of stuff, and it's basically the same
thing; you need to "lock" on more relations that 1:1, or there's no
way you can both "drift" and not at the same time.)
2) the first time somebody uses 1/3 and 1/4 at the
same time,
accumulating beat algorithms don't give the same result
reliably where they should.
Why not?
//David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate
.- The Return of Audiality! --------------------------------.
| Free/Open Source Audio Engine for use in Games or Studio. |
| RT and off-line synth. Scripting. Sample accurate timing. |
`---------------------------> http://olofson.net/audiality -'
--- http://olofson.net --- http://www.reologica.se ---