Re: Auto-beaming infrastructure redo

[Hans Aberg]

On 2 Jul 2010, at 23:11, Carl Sorensen wrote:

> In your earlier email (which I didn't understand before, but I think I
> figured it out now), you proposed a working notation with '  
> indicating "in
> one".  But then every specific proposal you wrote used ', so I  
> wasn't able
> to understand the difference between "in one" and "not in one".

I glossed over this: when using traditional numbers, they have a  
default subdivision if they have factors 2 or 3. For example 6 is the  
bipartite 3+3.

Now I introduced a pairs (k, n) where k >= 1 is an integer and n a  
note value, which I called "simple", following Germanic tradition.  
Then the traditional 6 is (3, n) + (3, n).

So since one probably cannot change the traditional implicit default  
in 6, one needs another notation if one wants to express (6, n). For  
example, 6'. Thus, in this variation, k' would be the same as (k, n),  
whereas k has some implicit, CPP traditional subdivision.

One might do it the other way around. Letting 6 be the simple (6, n),  
and have plethora 6' 6", whatever to indicate various common  
subdivisions.

In fact, some Bulgarian musicologists do that, speaking about meter 9  
type A and B, one is 2+2+2+3, and the other probably 2+3+2+2. So one  
might have simplified notation 9, 9A, 9B, etc., but it might be  
problematic remember it.

  Hans