The Acoustic Guitar Forum

Go Back   The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > PLAY and Write

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #61  
Old 10-27-2017, 03:17 PM
Guitar Slim II Guitar Slim II is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanron View Post
I've just listened to this for the first time and it's cat amongst the pigeons time I'm afraid. First off, it's too slow for 6/8. I'm hearing it as 3/4 and if you want to get the paired bars feel then it would be 6/4. Second, I'm not convinced it's all done on one guitar. If you've seen it done on one guitar then fair enough, just add the three open strings, low E and G and B. I've notated it as a single lead line thusly;

[IMG][/IMG]

With all the tied notes I've decided to miss out the slurs for hammer-ons and pull-offs. That could go on tab if tab was added below.
NO!!! Tempo has nothing to do with it. It's definitely 6/8 (2 pulses of 3). Look at the bass -- on the downbeat, lasts a full 6/8 measure. Listen to the rest of the song -- kick on the first pulse, snare on the second (3 +3 = 6/8)

6/4 is theoretically possible, But then you lose your beamed eighth notes, it becomes more difficult to read, and more complicated to score. The beaming is part of the distinctive look of 6/8, and there’s no question that this tune should be scored in 6/8.

Last edited by Guitar Slim II; 10-27-2017 at 03:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 10-27-2017, 03:40 PM
stanron stanron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,061
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guitar Slim II View Post
NO!!! Tempo has nothing to do with it. It's definitely 6/8 (2 pulses of 3). Look at the bass -- on the downbeat, lasts a full 6/8 measure. Listen to the rest of the song -- kick on the first pulse, snare on the second (3 +3 = 6/8).
It's too slow for 6/8. If you insist on the division by two then 6/4. The bottom number refers to the length of the beat. 6/8 is jig time. This is slower than standard waltz time. It's slightly faster than slow waltz time. Also all the beaming problems in scoring this go away when you move from 3/8 or 6/8 to 3/4 or 6/4. Also the half bar of 3/8 amidst the rest of the 6/8 disappears. Clarity trumps.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 10-27-2017, 03:45 PM
mistertomlinson mistertomlinson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonPR View Post
Strictly speaking, because you now have a bass voice, the staccato dots should go on top, not below the note - i.e. above the top of the stem. (I mentioned this in a previous post.)

Having listened to the original, it's only the top B (melody) note that's staccato anyway (not the octave below).
It definitely sounds like both notes in that chord are staccato. He plays it the same way in the intro too. You can really hear it in the intro.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonPR View Post
The actual timing is more like I showed in post #3. That last A note falls right on the last 8th of the bar, not a 16th before it. So although itneeds a staccato dot, it doesn't need an extending dot.

If you do want the extending dot it goes to the side, level with the top of the notehead to as to avoid the ledger line.
If I wrote it like below, is the 3 and accompanying lines absolutely necessary? Would it still be correct if I omitted them to save space?



Otherwise, I should just write it this way WITH the dotted note (not staccato on the last note)?



Quote:
Originally Posted by JonPR View Post
The slurs are good.
Would it still be correct if I put the slurs under the notes? This too would save space. But I wouldn't want to do it if it's incorrect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonPR View Post
I don't think so. IMO the shortening is insignificant.
Great! That saves me from obsessing about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonPR View Post
The only other thing I'd suggest is you level off the slopes of the beams a little. They're too extreme at the moment. Check the print versions shown elsewhere.
I thought they were a little much. I'm about to write up another now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guitar Slim II View Post
NO reader i know could sight read the rhythms you guys are throwing around -- not without a lot of stopping, head scratching, addition and subtraction...

Just write it as an ornament!
Should I just leave it alone? I feel like maybe I should have just written it like JonPR suggested, with the dotted note at the end.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 10-27-2017, 04:08 PM
stanron stanron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,061
Default

As a kind of edit to my last post I would add that there are pieces of music that are tripleted 4/4 that can sound like 3/4. Is Moonlight Sonata one of these? I have not listened to the whole track. Is this tripleted 4/4?
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 10-27-2017, 04:34 PM
mistertomlinson mistertomlinson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 31
Default

FINNNNAAAAALLLLLL??????


I'm getting ready to go talk to the tattoo artist now. I can still make corrections if needed, so please let me know if anything needs revising.

Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 10-27-2017, 06:17 PM
Guitar Slim II Guitar Slim II is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 176
Default

I really think you should take one more pass at measure 4. As I said, the second triplet makes a lot more sense if written as an ornament with grace notes on the second note -- and nothing else. As it is now, it looks nice but it is not readable -- and probably not accurate no matter how you slice it.

A properly written ornament would say it all to a good reader, and that's how it should be written, IMO.

Something like this: (Note, the spacing is a little too wide in this example. You could try putting the grace notes closer together and closer to the B.)


Last edited by Guitar Slim II; 10-27-2017 at 06:59 PM. Reason: Edited
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 10-27-2017, 07:04 PM
mistertomlinson mistertomlinson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guitar Slim II View Post
I really think you should take one more pass at measure 4. As I said, the second triplet makes a lot more sense if written as an ornament with grace notes on the second note -- and nothing else. As it is now, it looks nice but it is not readable -- and probably not accurate no matter how you slice it.

A properly written ornament would say it all to a good reader, and that's how it should be written, IMO.

Something like this: (Note, the spacing is a little too wide in this example. You could try putting the grace notes closer together and closer to the B.)

Is there a better way to write it without that ornament?

Because I talked to the tattoo artist and he mentioned they would have to redo my "repeat and fade," which I wanted him to do anyway using a more stylized font. But he said the writing was too small and cramped for them to accurately tattoo, at least that's what I inferred from what was said.

So, that ornament might be a little TOO small to tattoo well.

I told him I might need to make changes and he said to let him know ASAP if I do.

Total damage: $250
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 10-27-2017, 07:30 PM
mistertomlinson mistertomlinson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 31
Default

Sibelius accepts this and it sounds perfect. Would this work?

Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 10-27-2017, 09:50 PM
Guitar Slim II Guitar Slim II is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mistertomlinson View Post
Sibelius accepts this and it sounds perfect. Would this work?

This actually kind of makes my point. It may be accurate, but it’s unreadable. No site reader could read that kind of rhythm on the fly.

That’s why we abbreviate these kinds of thing as ornaments. Writing it as such would not be inaccurate or incorrect in any way. In fact, it would be the proper and conventional way to do it.

That’s my last two cents on the subject. Obviously I have a strong opinion about it, but of course it’s up to you.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 10-27-2017, 10:12 PM
Guitar Slim II Guitar Slim II is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mistertomlinson View Post
Sibelius accepts this and it sounds perfect. Would this work?

You know, there is one other option. In classical music, there are symbols for different kinds of ornaments, little squiggle’s, perhaps you’ve seen them. This particular ornament is called, I think, a “mordant”

And there is a symbol for that! Just put a mordant symbol above the B in the second group, and it should work. It looks like this:



BTW, those symbols were more common in Bach’s day. These days, most scores would indicate a simple ornament like this with grace notes, just for the sake of accuracy. But, the mordant symbol would also be proper, I believe.

And to someone actually reading the music, it would be more practical and , ironically, more clear than notating it all out down to the last 64 note.

Last edited by Guitar Slim II; 10-27-2017 at 10:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 10-27-2017, 11:19 PM
Guitar Slim II Guitar Slim II is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanron View Post
It's too slow for 6/8. If you insist on the division by two then 6/4. The bottom number refers to the length of the beat. 6/8 is jig time. This is slower than standard waltz time. It's slightly faster than slow waltz time. Also all the beaming problems in scoring this go away when you move from 3/8 or 6/8 to 3/4 or 6/4. Also the half bar of 3/8 amidst the rest of the 6/8 disappears. Clarity trumps.
Guess I need to respond to this -- for educational purposes, and to reassure the OP that he hasn't made a horrible mistake.

First, this is a compound meter (2 groups of three) not a simple meter, there's no question about that. It's indicated by multiple elements in the music, such as the way the bass notes fall on the downbeat, and the kick/snare groove in the main song. Scoring this in simple meter (3) would simply be wrong.

Second, tempo is NOT a deciding factor when choosing between 6/8 and 6/4. Just because a jig is fast, doesn't mean everything in 6/8 is supposed to be fast. Look up "Loure" or "Siciliana" -- two SLOW dance forms that are also in 6/8 meter.

As for clarity? Actually, beaming is extremely helpful to the sight reader. Beaming in 6/8 gives visual cues to rhythm, syncopations, etc. that would be obscure in 6/4 (without beaming). Beaming helps you track the groups and accents -- helps to keep track of BOTH rhythmic layers in this compound meter. Most sight readers are going to find 6/8 easier to read than 6/4 -- precisely BECAUSE it's beamed. (Readers also tend to prefer 4/4 over 2/2. That's why even when a tune IS in 2/2, we score it as if it's in 4 and call it cut time.)

Last edited by Guitar Slim II; 10-28-2017 at 12:05 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 10-28-2017, 06:21 AM
mistertomlinson mistertomlinson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guitar Slim II View Post
This actually kind of makes my point. It may be accurate, but it’s unreadable. No site reader could read that kind of rhythm on the fly.

That’s why we abbreviate these kinds of thing as ornaments. Writing it as such would not be inaccurate or incorrect in any way. In fact, it would be the proper and conventional way to do it.

That’s my last two cents on the subject. Obviously I have a strong opinion about it, but of course it’s up to you.
Please don't take anything I say the wrong way. You have been absolutely INTEGRAL in this process. But, I don't know that I'm as concerned with how easily it can be sight read as I am about it being an accurate representation of the music. I just worry a little about using some of the more obscure notations when I can just use the more traditional notes, slurs, etc.

But please, don't let that stop you from helping me anymore.

Edit: I did actually look up mordants and I'm not sure that's what I'm looking for. The way I understood it, you play a note, then a note higher, then back to the first note in quick succession. Whereas, in this song, the 3 notes descend.

Last edited by mistertomlinson; 10-28-2017 at 06:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 10-28-2017, 07:31 AM
stanron stanron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,061
Default

The bottom number of a time signature indicates how a beat is notated. How a beat is perceived is, perhaps, more subjective. Both Loure and Siciliana are old forms of music. Siciliana is Baroque and Baroque just happens to be my favourite music era. Metallica is not Baroque. This is not 6/8. My perception is 3/4. If you wish I will post current examples of 6/8, 3/4 and 3/2.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 10-28-2017, 07:55 AM
JonPR JonPR is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,359
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mistertomlinson View Post
Sibelius accepts this and it sounds perfect. Would this work?

It sounds very close, but is wrong notationally. The last note - a dotted 32nd note! - leaves a space in the bar, which does provide the staccato effect, but the space would need to be filled with a 64th note rest and a 16th rest. Don't even go there....
Make the last note a normal 8th (with staccato dot), and that would be fine - see my examples below...

Here's your example corrected, with three other options for comparison:

Notice I've left out the second B on the middle line. I think that's superfluous, but include it if you want. More importantly, notice the slur starts on the B, not the C. That's because the C and B are both picked - the slur indicates the hammer-on/pull-offs from the B.

#1 is yours, properly notated (the staccato dot makes it sound identical, taking the place of "short note plus rest(s)"). The twiddle is not quite as fast as the original, but good enough for the purposes of a tattoo! Notice the end of the slur is raised to leave room for the staccato dot (Sibelius does this automatically, suggesting it's the convention).

#2 is probably how the Guitar Slim's idea of the mordent symbol would sound; i.e., as a decoration of the middle 8th note, the twiddle coming too early.

#3 makes the twiddle sound too fast.

#4 is the "goldilocks" one IMO - just the right speed (rhythm) to match the recording - but maybe unnecessarily fussy as tattoo image?

BTW, the grace note option suggested by Guitar Slim is also a good enough representation in terms of notation and sound - the interpretation would be up to the player, but it could sound like any of my examples 1, 3 or 4 (3 and 4 most likely). But I can understand it's probably too fine for a tattooist to successfully accomplish.

Overall, I recommend #1.
__________________
"There's only two kinds of music: good and bad. I like both kinds." - Duke Ellington.

Last edited by JonPR; 10-28-2017 at 08:34 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 10-28-2017, 08:31 AM
JonPR JonPR is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,359
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanron View Post
The bottom number of a time signature indicates how a beat is notated. How a beat is perceived is, perhaps, more subjective. Both Loure and Siciliana are old forms of music. Siciliana is Baroque and Baroque just happens to be my favourite music era. Metallica is not Baroque. This is not 6/8. My perception is 3/4. If you wish I will post current examples of 6/8, 3/4 and 3/2.
IMO, this is perfectly well represented as 6/8, at a bpm of around 48.

I agree with Guitar Slim II, tempo is irrelevant. That might seem counter-intuitive - given that 6/8 is how we notate things like Irish jigs! - but I've seen this point often underlined by theorists more authoritative than me. (Try asking on https://www.reddit.com/r/musictheory/, for example.)

It could be represented as 3/4 (ie one 6/8 bar becoming two 3/4 bars), but the 3's definitely fall into pairs (with the exception of bar 5 in this excerpt). I guess 6/4 would be OK, with a dotted half-note representing the beat, but I see no problem with 6/8. Personally I like the way the beaming helps show the beats. The rhythm would be a little harder to follow in 6/4, while 3/4 would not show the slow 2-beat feel.
__________________
"There's only two kinds of music: good and bad. I like both kinds." - Duke Ellington.
Reply With Quote
Reply

  The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > PLAY and Write

Thread Tools



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, The Acoustic Guitar Forum
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=