[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: TimeSignature with note in denominator

From: Carl Sorensen
Subject: Re: TimeSignature with note in denominator
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2021 16:59:35 +0000
User-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.10.1b.201012

On 11/14/21, 9:33 AM, "David Kastrup" <> wrote:

    Kieren MacMillan <> writes:
    > Hi David,
    >> How is that uniquely identified?  Why couldn't it be subscripted with 10 
instead of 5?
    > I suppose it could. It could also be subscripted with a π or a √2. I
    > can’t stop people from doing what they want to do.
    > Simultaneously true is the fact that the musical duration “one
    > quintuplet-sixteenth” has one and only one visual representation,
    > regardless of what Lilypond thinks or is told to do.
    Again you are evading the stated problem.  The question was about the
    representation of time signature 8/20, not about "one
    quintuplet-sixteenth".  8/20 does not specify more than the basic
    subdivision for expressing beats (not necessarily identical with the
    number of beats as signatures like 9/8 show) and how much material fits
    a bar.  It does not identify how that material may be structured or
    expressed, in opposition to your and Carl's statements about what
    meaning the parts of a time signature are supposed to inherently have,
    leading to a proposal of generally changing the current representation
    by involving musical durations for the denominator.


Do disagree with the statement that "The 20 on the bottom of the time signature 
indicates a duration of 1/20 of a whole note"?  If you disagree with this, what 
do you think the 20  on the bottom of the time signature means?


    David Kastrup

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]