When in a measure, one encounters a single 8th note followed by 3 (or more) eighth notes that are connected by a bar, are the barred ones considered a group? That is, does the single 8th get an emphasis and then the first 8th of the group?
It looks like this: 8 8-8-8
How to play eighth notes: single followed by barred group
-
fyffer
- Posts: 1032
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:27 am
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: Rhode Island, USA
- Contact:
Without seeing the actual notation it's hard to tell what's intended.
However, if it really is just as you say, a single 8th note followed by three grouped 8th notes, I'd venture to guess that the group of 3 is intended to be a triplet, and the transcriber missed the little 3 above or below the group.
Either that, or the intention is for the first 8th to be played shorter.
Again, all this is pure speculation based on not seeing what you are seeing.
It heavily depends on time signature as well.
Do you know abc notation? If so, can you put what you have in that?
However, if it really is just as you say, a single 8th note followed by three grouped 8th notes, I'd venture to guess that the group of 3 is intended to be a triplet, and the transcriber missed the little 3 above or below the group.
Either that, or the intention is for the first 8th to be played shorter.
Again, all this is pure speculation based on not seeing what you are seeing.
It heavily depends on time signature as well.
Do you know abc notation? If so, can you put what you have in that?
___\|/______________________________
|___O____|_O_O_o_|_o_O__O__|_O__O__|
|___O____|_O_O_o_|_o_O__O__|_O__O__|
-
AaronMalcomb
- Posts: 2205
- Joined: Sat May 25, 2002 6:00 pm
- antispam: No
- Location: Bellingham, WA
-
headwizer
- Posts: 204
- Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 12:28 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Contact:
I will look up the tune - this was a question that I remembered from a while back. I did find another popular tune that could be instructive - Kemp's Jig. In the second measure of the 5th line, there are 4 8th notes, each pair connected by a bar. In the second measure of the 6th line, 4 8th notes are grouped together by a bar and then 2 8th notes by a bar. The time signature is 4/4. How are these 8th notes played - and which notes get the emphasis?
-
fyffer
- Posts: 1032
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:27 am
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: Rhode Island, USA
- Contact:
Oh! Now I understand the question!
First of all, you're looking at piano music (or some kind of "condensed score") so it's a completely different idea from a melodic instrument.
Secondly, in some ways, how the eighth notes are articulated has no bearing on whether they are all notated separate, beamed in pairs, or beamed as four notes together. Stylistically, the final note in any set of beamed notes may be played a little shorter, but I think that's a matter of taste.
In this tune (which by the way is nowhere near a jig, but would probably be played more as a reel), the emphasis on any particular eighth note would depend on the beat it falls on. In this case, the emphasis should be on beats 1 and 3, which, now that I look at the piece again, is why the eighth notes are broken up the way they are. The measure in which the 4 eighth notes are split into pairs happen to fall on beats 2 and 3. In the sets where there are four eighth notes beamed together, they are on beats 1 and 2 or 2 and 4. Seeing as this piece would probably be played "in 2", i.e. "cut time", the 4 beamed eighth notes would all fit inside one beat, where the ones that are split would fall on the second and first halves, respectively of different beats of the measure.
Was that too much? I think I got it right though.
First of all, you're looking at piano music (or some kind of "condensed score") so it's a completely different idea from a melodic instrument.
Secondly, in some ways, how the eighth notes are articulated has no bearing on whether they are all notated separate, beamed in pairs, or beamed as four notes together. Stylistically, the final note in any set of beamed notes may be played a little shorter, but I think that's a matter of taste.
In this tune (which by the way is nowhere near a jig, but would probably be played more as a reel), the emphasis on any particular eighth note would depend on the beat it falls on. In this case, the emphasis should be on beats 1 and 3, which, now that I look at the piece again, is why the eighth notes are broken up the way they are. The measure in which the 4 eighth notes are split into pairs happen to fall on beats 2 and 3. In the sets where there are four eighth notes beamed together, they are on beats 1 and 2 or 2 and 4. Seeing as this piece would probably be played "in 2", i.e. "cut time", the 4 beamed eighth notes would all fit inside one beat, where the ones that are split would fall on the second and first halves, respectively of different beats of the measure.
Was that too much? I think I got it right though.
___\|/______________________________
|___O____|_O_O_o_|_o_O__O__|_O__O__|
|___O____|_O_O_o_|_o_O__O__|_O__O__|
-
headwizer
- Posts: 204
- Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 12:28 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Contact:
Thanks fyffer!
"First of all, you're looking at piano music (or some kind of "condensed score") so it's a completely different idea from a melodic instrument. "
What do you mean that it's a completely different idea? Are you referring to the score containing notes that fall below the top treble notes?
"in some ways, how the eighth notes are articulated has no bearing on whether they are all notated separate, beamed in pairs, or beamed as four notes together. "
That's what I thought, but then I guess my question for music notation academics is: why is the "beaming of notes" not tied to articulation? Certainly it would be very handy for the player if this convention were followed and hardly any extra effort is required on the part of the composer/publisher to do this (or so it seems to me
).
"Seeing as this piece would probably be played 'in 2', i.e. 'cut time', the 4 beamed eighth notes would all fit inside one beat...."
I am curious about this: why would a player tend to interpret this piece in cut time, when there is a 4/4 common time signature? Now, it happens that the version of Kemp's Jig in the Ochs tutorial is indeed 2/2. Is there a reason that this version is more suited for cut time than common time?
"First of all, you're looking at piano music (or some kind of "condensed score") so it's a completely different idea from a melodic instrument. "
What do you mean that it's a completely different idea? Are you referring to the score containing notes that fall below the top treble notes?
"in some ways, how the eighth notes are articulated has no bearing on whether they are all notated separate, beamed in pairs, or beamed as four notes together. "
That's what I thought, but then I guess my question for music notation academics is: why is the "beaming of notes" not tied to articulation? Certainly it would be very handy for the player if this convention were followed and hardly any extra effort is required on the part of the composer/publisher to do this (or so it seems to me
). "Seeing as this piece would probably be played 'in 2', i.e. 'cut time', the 4 beamed eighth notes would all fit inside one beat...."
I am curious about this: why would a player tend to interpret this piece in cut time, when there is a 4/4 common time signature? Now, it happens that the version of Kemp's Jig in the Ochs tutorial is indeed 2/2. Is there a reason that this version is more suited for cut time than common time?
-
fyffer
- Posts: 1032
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:27 am
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: Rhode Island, USA
- Contact:
What I meant was Piano scores don't have flute articulation in mind. Phrasing is indicated, usually by slurs and ties, but in this piece there are no such markings. That's all I meant. If articulations were intended, they would be marked (I would think).headwizer wrote:Thanks fyffer!
"First of all, you're looking at piano music (or some kind of "condensed score") so it's a completely different idea from a melodic instrument. "
What do you mean that it's a completely different idea? Are you referring to the score containing notes that fall below the top treble notes?
I agree this would be a "handy convention", but the problem is just that -- it's not a "convention" at all. The same notation language is used for all instruments, even when there is a different intention. For example, a slur indication in piano music means something different than the same slur in flute music, though the intention I'll agree is similar.headwizer wrote: "in some ways, how the eighth notes are articulated has no bearing on whether they are all notated separate, beamed in pairs, or beamed as four notes together. "
That's what I thought, but then I guess my question for music notation academics is: why is the "beaming of notes" not tied to articulation? Certainly it would be very handy for the player if this convention were followed and hardly any extra effort is required on the part of the composer/publisher to do this (or so it seems to me
First of all, it's not a jig (unless the title is intentionally tongue-in-cheek), but plays better as a reel. When you're playing or listening to a reel, you generally feel the 1 and 3, and generally tap your foot as such. The way I think of it is if it's comfortable to tap at that tempo (say, with the half-note at around 60 bpm), then it's in cut time. Now 4/4 and cut time look the same, notation-wise, so this is really semantics, but a "reel feel" is cut time.headwizer wrote: "Seeing as this piece would probably be played 'in 2', i.e. 'cut time', the 4 beamed eighth notes would all fit inside one beat...."
I am curious about this: why would a player tend to interpret this piece in cut time, when there is a 4/4 common time signature? Now, it happens that the version of Kemp's Jig in the Ochs tutorial is indeed 2/2. Is there a reason that this version is more suited for cut time than common time?
-Chris
___\|/______________________________
|___O____|_O_O_o_|_o_O__O__|_O__O__|
|___O____|_O_O_o_|_o_O__O__|_O__O__|
-
BoneQuint
- Posts: 827
- Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 2:17 am
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: Bellingham, WA
- Contact:
Kemp's Jig isn't an Irish jig of course, the title refers to an English Morris dance "jig" written during the Renaissance.
As it says in the link below, "A dance for less than a full set, usually one or two men, is termed a 'jig'."
http://users.rcn.com/jmoskin/morris/pages/jigs.html
I believe beaming is usually done to make the music easier to read, not to imply phrasing.
I also feel Kemp's Jig more in cut time, but bouncier than a reel. And 120 per quarter note seems faster than I've heard it, more like 90 or 100 I think.
That score could be for Anglo concertina, which has as its lowest note an F below the treble staff, just like that arrangement -- I'll have to try it out to see if it works.
As it says in the link below, "A dance for less than a full set, usually one or two men, is termed a 'jig'."
http://users.rcn.com/jmoskin/morris/pages/jigs.html
I believe beaming is usually done to make the music easier to read, not to imply phrasing.
I also feel Kemp's Jig more in cut time, but bouncier than a reel. And 120 per quarter note seems faster than I've heard it, more like 90 or 100 I think.
That score could be for Anglo concertina, which has as its lowest note an F below the treble staff, just like that arrangement -- I'll have to try it out to see if it works.