What makes a composer decide between time signatures 3/4, 3/8, or 3/2?
Is there a logic to why, for example, a composer would choose 3/8 or 3/2 over 3/4?
It seems like the n/8 would consume more ink than n/4, or make me look at more stuff at a time (cognitive overload for me). The larger the denominator, the more cramped the score looks.
I see a lot of adagio music with 32nd and even 64th notes, and they are actually slow. Why not write them in n/4. Yes, it'll result in more pages, but I think it will be easier on my eyes?
I also see hollow notes that are supposed to be relatively fast, pieces in n/2 or even n/1. That's tough to read because you'll end up with fast quarter notes that are not beamed in groups of 3, 4, or 6. Why would a composer or engraver want to do this?
If I were to hear something for the first time, I would be shocked to find out that the time signature is something like 12/2 or 4/16.
So tell me, what circumstances would call for 3/8 and not 3/4? 4/2 and not 4/4? Tell me if it's just perspective and that the performer just has to suck it up.
(1)1 Comments
Sorted by latest first Latest Oldest Best
Consider you're walking up the stairs. You could have a lot of small steps or just a handful of huge steps. As you walk up the steps, somebody is trying to match your movements with the drum in front of them.
So maybe it only takes two huge steps to get to the top of your staircase, or to the end of the phrase or the song. What if you have four steps, or maybe 16 steps? It's easier for the drummer to track when to strike a note/beat.
Ideally one is conforming their time signature to the convenience of the performer, and thus there are more natural and less natural fits.
Terms of Use Privacy policy Contact About Cancellation policy © freshhoot.com2025 All Rights reserved.