The rarely/never asked question about Time signature and Meter

My friend told me that any piece would sound the same whether notated in 4/4 or 2/2 , even in 11/8 or 7/2 etc . ,

at the end its a type of measurement resembling a ruler where we agree on the value of one single measuring unit , like 1 centimeter or 1 inch , and then grouping every 10 centimeters , and so on..

I guess that mathematically he may be right , but my musical instinct tells me not ,

Can u help me understand this matter once and for all ,,

Thank you.

It's a few things, and they support both sides.

The first is something that I far overuse in my music. You can think of meter as simply marking the size of the measure.

However, you run in to other issues. The time has a big influence on feel. Stress patterns, especially in music that's got a beat, are very influential. With 4/4 and 2/2, the stresses would be different even if the tempo was set so the note-moments happened at the same time. The stress in 4/4 is (in strength level) 2-1-3-1|; in 2/2 the same pattern would be 2-1|2-1|. This is complicated by additive rhythms like 5/4 or 7/8; the stresses are not set, but traditionally come in groups of 2 or 3.

3/4 and 6/8 pose another issue. While 3/4 is stressed as 3-1-1|, 6/8 is 3-1-1-3-1-1|, as opposed to if the 3/4 rhythm were superimposed, which would be 3-1-2-1-2-1|.

All this is complicated more by the beauty of the fact that it doesn't really matter except as something to be aware of.

To add to Ferk's post a good comparison is 3/2 and 6/4. Mathematically they are equal but as meter in music has roots in poetry, these meters differ.

3/2 = 1 2/1 2/ 1 2

6/4= 1 2 3/ 4 5 6

The above is similar to Ferk's description of how 3/4 and 6/8 differ.

I also have had a piece where it took me several drafts to determine the meter was 5/4. 5/4 can shift from 1 2/3 4 5 or 123/45, yet it establishes a meter 5/4 if you hear the a strong downbeat occurring periodically every 5 beats.

A better way to think of meter more as it is used in poetry - the difference being you have greater freedom in its use with musikc.

As with other things like that, I touched the topic in one of my lessons here:

It's interesting you mention Bartok, but let's talk a little about rhythm and organization. You're both using accents and metric changes, so basically I'm wondering what your intention is with the changes.

Opinions vary among musicians, and I've come across people who play 4/4 ALWAYS as 4/4, regardless if it's Ligeti's Atmospheres (!) or Bach, which isn't such a great idea. The difference is mostly, if you want your rhythm to come through the traditional metric-given accents, you would be inclined to use sig changes like you have.

But there's also a different reason why you would want to use different time signatures: It messes up the instrumentalists pulse. When there are many changes in signature, it provokes a break in the beat, it makes it harder to predict what comes next. Musicians trained with typical literature where very seldom do such changes happen will have always a difficult time trying to think in lines that change their basic beat every measure or so. This can be intended on purpose to cause a type of "stiff" or "robotic" playing, since keeping count overtakes the traditional rubato/flexible way people would phrase their lines with a consistent regular pulse.

Messiaen for example is a great example with his Valeur Ajout�. It's designed on purpose to cause you to have to count and intellectually figure out the rhythm, playing at odds with the automatic traditional sense of a stable pulse. It also makes, if maybe subconsciously, all notes have a particular weight to them as phrasing becomes harder to do in a traditional sense, which is ideal for serial music (which intends all notes as equally important.)

So you can go in various directions with the rhythm aspect. You can use the metric only for organization (ala Stravinsky's sacre or Ligeti's Atmospheres) or you can use changes in the metric to emphasize different base pulses (Bartok,) then there's the other option of changing scraggy up on purpose to make it purposely hard to follow the rhythm in any organic manner (Messiaen, some Stravinsky.)

So yeah. There are various ways to treat time signatures.

LOL SSC - quoting from our old lesson thread .... good ole days weren't they?

SO, my prior post would fall in the meter to emphasize a base pulse category.

Funny thing, I have encountered composition teachers who dissuade students from the third approach of meter - changing it up to make it very difficult to follow the rhythm in any organic manner (though Messiaen doesn't do this all the time - in his second rhythmic etude for piano, he writes in his preface he keeps the meter 2/4 throughout as to simplify the organization of the piece - Here is just a portion of what he says about the etude -

"The great novelty lies in the number of note-values used in this piece. Even in the works of Stravinsky, Jolivet and Boulez, few note -values are used , despite irrational values (two against three, triplets which cross the bar line, and so forth) ... The piece is written in a virtual 2/4, in order to facilitate performance (!)"

Funny thing about this Etude is despite his successful efforts to make it easier to READ, it remains quite difficult to play well as he uses 24 different note values, 12 touches and 7 dynamic levels!! And there is not strong sense of a 2/4 pulse or any rhythm except for the occasional pedal notes struck in the lowest registers (showing Messiaen could not get away from being the organist he always was!).

Here is the piece and the poster has graciously posted the introduction to the piece - enjoy SSC and all - the piece is quite gorgeous! Feel free to correct any misstatements.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME5laJctGCo&feature=related

I don't think anyone wanted to be mean like that, but that's absolutely true!

Wait I can vote on my own posts¿!?$e029e

Dominus - the only difference between an amateur and a professional musician is the professional bases his/her livelihood on music while the amateur does not. Intelligence has nothing to do with it.

And the original question is not dumb. Unfortunately it isn't phrased in a way to sound knowledgeable about the subject - the person is brave enough to not think they know something and seeks knowledge.

When was the last time YOU allowed yourself to look the fool so you may actually learn something?

I don't think anyone said the question was dumb, CO.

oh nevermind - I never now how to take some of Dominus' posts. Read your private message inbox. I sent you one. No rush on an answer naturally.

While 2/2 and 4/4 might be almost the same, the accents are different. That could really screw up something. Like if a piece is in 6/2, and you beat in two, it will sound different than in 6. The accents are different, so while it will be the same music, it will have a different beat.

So the answer is that your friend is wrong, eliyia.

Thank you for your informative replies ,I got your points and i appreciate ,

I'm sorry if the title sounded as dumb as me , it's just that I couldn't find the right words at that moment and i needed the information no matter what .

One more thing to ask ; Can anyone recommend to me a book dealing primarily with this issue? making the Rhythm/odd meters/pulse/beat etc its main subject .. if there were any at all! Dominus :P , and thx to composerorganist for clearing me up ,

thx again to all

I'm glad i joined this forum.

eliyia,

Most of the books written on this subject will be written for drummers. (Like this one:Drummer's Guide to Odd Time Signatures) So if you're willing to put up with playing from drum notation to learn odd time signatures, that will be fine. However, the best way to get a feel for them is to play/write music that is in odd time. Notation software can be very useful for this since you can get the computer to play the odd time signature while your still getting a feel for it.

Also, heres an example of the difference between various time signatures. Played without accents they sound very much the same, but most performers will add the accents in order to "feel" the meter better:

Different time.MUS

eliyia,

Most of the books written on this subject will be written for drummers.

Drummers eh? I wonder what Bartok has to say about that. . .

Where the hell did you get that idea?

When I was a kid, I got kicked out of the library one time. So I had to get creative when it came to learning. I found that by "borrowing" scores for certain stores and then "borrowing" the music too, and then playing and reading them together that I learned a lot about time and a lot of cool stuff. I consider that time in history support important because it got me to think about why a composer was doing what he was doing. I suggest you find a few scores in mathematically equal time sigs and see how they are different and trying to explain to yourself why the composer made that choice. It's fun and informative!

Look, that's way too much work Ralph. You're obviously dating yourself, because we all know Google is the only book anyone needs anymore.

With Google's public domain book search and IMSLP we are unstoppable. Or at least unstoppable up to 1922 in the U.S.

With Google's public domain book search and IMSLP we are unstoppable. Or at least unstoppable up to 1922 in the U.S.

And don't forget choral wiki!!!!!

http://www.cpdl.org/wiki

How about some you-tube's that demonstrate this meter/accent thing clearly? :) and also some where it shows perhaps the opposite ...... :blink:

Doesn't use of pitch also somehow create accents?

I still prefer libraries. To me it's easier and I personally hate reading stuff off a screen.

Well as already said many times, the time signature is the logical and natural way to divide up a piece of music. a guide for the performer more than anything.

However, take a mathematical performance (like Sibelius or Finale),, with no sense of musical feel- it can draw the barlines any way it likes, and it will still play back the same, since there is still the same note values in the bar.

Eg you could notate a waltz in 6/8, but you may find yourself with 2 beats in the bar instead of 3, which will make for very confused dancers! :D

No I will not link you to youtube. The point is simple and straightforward.

For a demonstration, find your nearest elementary school and sit in on the first week of General Music class.

so the accent is on 1 and 3 in this (ragtime)?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwdnDcAyTXo&feature=related

also POP music .... the accent is on 1 and 3?

also say I write a tune in 3/4 with a rest on 1 all the way through... the accent is on 1?

Seems like a lot of people have difficulty explaining rhythm. There are five components that determine rhythm: Pulse, Beat, Tempo, and Pattern.

Beat: How measures/bars of music are divided.

Subdivision: How beats of a measure are divided.

Pulse: This is the notated representation of the beat of a measure.

Tempo: This is the speed of the pulse as it occurs in performance.

Pattern: This is the grouping of beats and beat subdivisions that constitute rhythm.

So, if you understand the terminology I'm using, it should be -very- easy to understand how two rhythmic patterns can sound identical.

In a bar of 4/4 time, suppose we have a quarter note, two eighth notes, then two quarter notes. We count this pattern as: "One, Two-and, Three, Four."

Now, suppose we have a bar of 2/2 time. We have the same notes, a quarter note, two eighth notes, then two more quarter notes. We count this pattern as: "One, And-uh, Two, And."

Why do we count it differently?

The 4/4 bar has a different pulse than the 2/2 bar. Even though the notation is identical, the pulse of a 4/4 measure is represented by four quarter notes. The pulse of a 2/2 measure is represented by two half notes. We know this because of the bottom number of the metric. In 4/4, this is represented as 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 = 4/4. We call these "quarter" notes for a reason. In 2/2, this is represented as 1/2 + 1/2 = 2/2. We call these "half" notes for a reason. 6/8, 7/8, and 9/8 are exceptions I will get to in a moment... forget they exist for a moment.

So, if the only thing that's different about 4/4 and 2/2 is the time signature, how can two patterns sound absolutely identical? Answer: Tempo.

See, the 4/4 measure and the 2/2 measure will -ONLY- sound identical if the tempo of the 4/4 measure is twice as fast as the 2/2 measure. That is -the only way- these measures will sound identical if the note values are the same. You can try this on your own in a notation program like Finale or Sibelius. Put the same rhythm in two measures and have one measure in 4/4, the other in 2/2. Use any arbitrary tempo you like for the 2/2 measure... as long as you make sure the tempo indicates that the HALF NOTE = X. Let's just say that tempo is 90. Your 2/2 measure will have: Half Note = 90. In your 4/4 measure, the quarter note is the pulse. So, based on your 2/2 measure's tempo, you can create an identical rhythm in the 4/4 bar by setting your tempo to: Quarter Note = 180. These patterns will be identical in sound. The only difference between these two measures is the tempo.

In more advanced reading of tempo, you'll come across something called "Simple Meter" and something else called "Compound Meter." Simple meter is what I just discussed - meters that do exactly what they say they do. There are no gray areas. If the bottom number is '2' or '4', it's almost always a simple meter. A "Compound Meter" is a meter that could have more than one interpretation based on the tempo, the speed of the pulse. In these meters, the -Tempo- will determine the Pulse, unlike Simple Meters where the Beat determines the Pulse.

In a measure of 6/8, the -pulse- could be each eighth note of the measure... or it could be two dotted quarter notes, which subdivide into three eighth notes each and are counted as: One, And, Uh, Two, And, Uh.

The tempo determines this because the speed of the pulse may necessitate one or the other. If the tempo indicates that the Eighth Note = 78, it is nearly impossible for a performer to play this accurately if the conductor is using the Dotted Quarter Note as a pulse for the measure. S/he will likely conduct all six eighth notes in that measure. A good example is Wagner's Prelude to Tristan Und Isolde. The tempo is so slow, the conductor -must- conduct all six eighth notes.

But the trio section of a march by John Phillip Sousa written in 6/8 time will likely have a Tempo like: Dotted Quarter Note = 92. It would be impractical for the conductor to even attempt to conduct each eighth note - if the Tempo indicated that each eighth note was the pulse in a Sousa March where the Dotted Quarter = 92, the Tempo would read: Eighth Note = 286... which is ridiculously fast to conduct. Try waving your arms that fast...

Then you have Mixed Meters like 7/8. These meters are not balanced at the subdivision level (where we divide each beat into smaller units of space in a measure). Notice that you cannot evenly divide 7/8. In music, we composers generally tell performers how to divide the pulse, which will fill in all the blanks. We can group a bar of 7/8 into any variation of two Quarter Notes and one Dotted Quarter Note. Remember, the division of a Quarter is two Eighth Notes, and the division of a Dotted Quarter is three Eighth Notes. So you have groups like 2+2+3, 3+2+2, or 2+3+2 in a measure of 7/8. These numbers refer to the subdivision of the pulse.

So, there's your lesson in rhythm. If you understand the terminology and experiment a little, you won't have to buy a book about rhythm. It's very intuitive.

-AA

To AntiA's glossary I'd like to add:

Metre: the (usually repeating) sequence of strong and weak beats. E.g. in 4/4: *Strong Weak Strong Weak*, with the first being the strongest.

Rhythm: the timing and length of each note the instrument plays.

You should never confuse the two since they are not synonymous. In a sense, the Metre is an "imagined rhythm", which is suggested by the music, but which the music itself may stick with or deviate from.

To AntiA's glossary I'd like to add:

Metre: the (usually repeating) sequence of strong and weak beats. E.g. in 4/4: *Strong Weak Strong Weak*, with the first being the strongest.

Rhythm: the timing and length of each note the instrument plays.

You should never confuse the two since they are not synonymous. In a sense, the Metre is an "imagined rhythm", which is suggested by the music, but which the music itself may stick with or deviate from.

Well, thanks for adding to the "glossary", but I'm going to disagree with the terms as they overcomplicate something that is shockingly much easier to understand when we look at these terms as:

Meter: The fractional representation of how beats are organized in a measure, also called a Time Signature

Rhythm: The pattern that results from the combination of various note durations

The confusion that erupts from learning about meter and rhythm, pulse and beat, time signature and meter (which aren't just synonyms, they literally -mean- exactly the same thing) is nonsense. It's much simpler to look at music rhythm as increments of time in sound space. A measure is a division of the sound space. A pulse is simply a division of the sound within the measure. A subdivision of the pulse is just the division of the sound within the pulse duration. This is all an abstract of the occurrence of sound in time. It's simpler to just think of it as a break down of duration divisions.

The total space of sound divides down to...

The measure which divides down to...

The pulse which divides down to...

The subdivision of the pulse...

And the tempo governs the speed that these divisions occur.

All of which account for any occurrence of sound in time, thus creating the freedom to organize patterns of sound in time in any manner we like. :)

Hard and fast definitions do not apply -- I don't think pulse can be subdivided, etc etc, but they're just words describing phenomena. Understand the phenomena, let the terminology come later.

...say I write a tune in 3/4 with a rest on 1 all the way through... the accent is on 1?

Rests are often more important than notes when dictating feel like that... a rest on 1 of every bar would be a VERY potent accent.