Re: TimeSignature with note in denominator

[address@hidden]

Kieran,

----- Kieren MacMillan <kieren@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.