A Notation Question?!
Question: A Notation Question!?
I am writing a piece of music in 6/8 time!. In this time signature, there are two dotted quarter notes to each measure, correct!? In my composition, dotted quarter notes make up the bass throughout the entire piece, two for every measure!. These dotted notes are accompanied by rapid notes!. I played it on the piano, and I found that when I played the entire thing slowly, there are 8 of these rapid notes to one dotted quarter note, or 16 notes total in one measure!. I am beginning to write this music, and I seemingly cannot figure out what note value this is! Is it a tuplet of some sort!? Please help!. Thanks!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Answers:
there are two ways to notate it!.
you can have the left hand in 6/8 and the right hand in 2/4
or you can have the fast notes written as a tuplet!. in this case you write them as thirty-second notes and put a bracket around them that says " 16:12 "
meaning 16 thirty-second notes in the span of 12 thirty-second notes!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
you can have the left hand in 6/8 and the right hand in 2/4
or you can have the fast notes written as a tuplet!. in this case you write them as thirty-second notes and put a bracket around them that says " 16:12 "
meaning 16 thirty-second notes in the span of 12 thirty-second notes!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
There are 6 eighth-notes in 6/8 time (6 * 1/8 = 6/8)!.
Logically, then, there are 16 *dotted thirty-second notes* in 6/8 time (16 * 3/64 = 16 * (1/32 + 1/64) = 6/8)!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Logically, then, there are 16 *dotted thirty-second notes* in 6/8 time (16 * 3/64 = 16 * (1/32 + 1/64) = 6/8)!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Why don't you just write it in 2/4 or 4/4!? The half note will replace your dotted quarter, and the 8 notes can be written as 8 sixteenth notes - no tuplets required!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
doesnt sound like 6/8Www@Enter-QA@Com
Wow, a lot of people are giving you a hard time about this question for no good reason!.
Sure, you can do this in 6/8, and yes, it's a tuplet!. If they're all the same duration, then it's an octuplet -- 8 notes in the place of 6!. Write them as 16th notes, beam 8 of them together, and then label the group of eight just as you would label a normal triplet!.!.!.but instead of the number 3, use the number 8!. (or if you want to be really clear, use 8:6, which means 8 in the place of 6)!.
[you could also write this as 32nd notes, 8:12!.!.!.it's going to result in the same thing]
I don't know that this note value has a "name" like 16th note, 32nd note!. If you really want a name, look in Henry Cowell's book "New Musical Resources" (1930, I think!?) He deals with that kind of stuff!.!.!.might be in there!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Sure, you can do this in 6/8, and yes, it's a tuplet!. If they're all the same duration, then it's an octuplet -- 8 notes in the place of 6!. Write them as 16th notes, beam 8 of them together, and then label the group of eight just as you would label a normal triplet!.!.!.but instead of the number 3, use the number 8!. (or if you want to be really clear, use 8:6, which means 8 in the place of 6)!.
[you could also write this as 32nd notes, 8:12!.!.!.it's going to result in the same thing]
I don't know that this note value has a "name" like 16th note, 32nd note!. If you really want a name, look in Henry Cowell's book "New Musical Resources" (1930, I think!?) He deals with that kind of stuff!.!.!.might be in there!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
in 6/8 time, the count is in groups of three 8th notes!.!.!.!.i!.e!. 1 2 3, 4 5 6 etc!. HAving said that, you can see there are two groupings of notes, right!? The first one (123) and the second group (456)!. So you CAN count it simply as 1, 2 !.!.!.1,2 etc as the waltzing feel of the three notes per beat go by!. What makes 6/8 sound like 6/8 is the feel of these groups of three notes - kind of like a waltz!.
In your explanation, you are saying that you are putting 8 rapid notes over each of the primary two counts of each measure!. Unless there is another melody or drum pattern supplying that waltzing feel (ONE 23 FOUR 56) what you have described is a 2/4 time signature with eight 32nd notes per quarter note!. If, however, you do indeed have that waltzing feel happening from the drums or another melody or the strumming pattern of the guitar, then you would notate these notes as follows:
Line up each of the fast notes over the dotted quarter note so it is evident that the 8 notes belong to the dotted quarter, put two bars across the notes connecting all eight together and write the number "8" under that grouping!. This will show that you are forcing eight notes into the space normally reserved for (what would we would expect to see in 6/8) three or 6 notes!.
PaigeWww@Enter-QA@Com
In your explanation, you are saying that you are putting 8 rapid notes over each of the primary two counts of each measure!. Unless there is another melody or drum pattern supplying that waltzing feel (ONE 23 FOUR 56) what you have described is a 2/4 time signature with eight 32nd notes per quarter note!. If, however, you do indeed have that waltzing feel happening from the drums or another melody or the strumming pattern of the guitar, then you would notate these notes as follows:
Line up each of the fast notes over the dotted quarter note so it is evident that the 8 notes belong to the dotted quarter, put two bars across the notes connecting all eight together and write the number "8" under that grouping!. This will show that you are forcing eight notes into the space normally reserved for (what would we would expect to see in 6/8) three or 6 notes!.
PaigeWww@Enter-QA@Com
We need to know if those 8 notes are DEAD EVEN, or if some are faster than others - then we can help!.
Additional - OK, it appears that you are just being stubborn about this!. If you CHANGE THE METER from 6/8 to 2/4 - or 4/4 - and keep the triplet portion feel by WRITING triplets, and the duple feel by writing logical duple division, you will get what you want, and more importantly, PLAYERS will be able to play what you want!. If you stick to your guns, you cannot intelligently notate the sounds you are hearing!. Didving things into dooted 32nds notes is just crasy - I am *sre* that the person who suggested this did so to show you that YOUR WAY is not logical, and that you should re-meter and re-bar this section!. Nobody will know ("gotta be in 6/8") - they will not see it, only hear it - and yet it will be played correctly!.
Hmmm - any reason why I would be 3 TDs for asking for more information!? This actually allowed OTHER people to give intelligent answers, after all!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Additional - OK, it appears that you are just being stubborn about this!. If you CHANGE THE METER from 6/8 to 2/4 - or 4/4 - and keep the triplet portion feel by WRITING triplets, and the duple feel by writing logical duple division, you will get what you want, and more importantly, PLAYERS will be able to play what you want!. If you stick to your guns, you cannot intelligently notate the sounds you are hearing!. Didving things into dooted 32nds notes is just crasy - I am *sre* that the person who suggested this did so to show you that YOUR WAY is not logical, and that you should re-meter and re-bar this section!. Nobody will know ("gotta be in 6/8") - they will not see it, only hear it - and yet it will be played correctly!.
Hmmm - any reason why I would be 3 TDs for asking for more information!? This actually allowed OTHER people to give intelligent answers, after all!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
"The music must be in 6/8 time" !.!.!. square peg round hole!? Why must the music be in 6/8, can you do a time signature change for that section, or is this played against some true 6/8!? [This smacks of teacher giving you a challenge to figure out!.]
I'll maintain that the right thing to do is to rewrite this in 4; but since you have to do it your way, there would be two groups of eight bracketed 32nds (demisemiquaver) with either 4 over/under it or the ratio 8:12; again two groups of eight!.
You would want to break it up because (presumably) the fundamental (bass) changes in half-measure increments!.
!.!.!. Visually it might be even better to do sets of 4 with the ratio 4:6!.
=====
Edit: Vic G is right too !.!.!. but dotted thirty-seconds!? !.!.!. when are you ever going to see fistfuls of those!?Www@Enter-QA@Com
I'll maintain that the right thing to do is to rewrite this in 4; but since you have to do it your way, there would be two groups of eight bracketed 32nds (demisemiquaver) with either 4 over/under it or the ratio 8:12; again two groups of eight!.
You would want to break it up because (presumably) the fundamental (bass) changes in half-measure increments!.
!.!.!. Visually it might be even better to do sets of 4 with the ratio 4:6!.
=====
Edit: Vic G is right too !.!.!. but dotted thirty-seconds!? !.!.!. when are you ever going to see fistfuls of those!?Www@Enter-QA@Com