time signature question

[vincenti]

[quote]that does help. I think it is one of those things that I do unconsciously and need to learn why and how. as i get older and lose any desire to be a professional musician, I have grown more interested in what makes things tick; developing a method to the madness can't be a bad thing.[/quote]

Yea counting can sound tedius on paper, but the most important thing is to get the feel for the groove, and by doing a few counting exercises like these even if only for 5 minutes you really get more connected with the beat. Even if you don't count when you play over it.

[Panphobia]

Its hard to say what the time sig is without an example mp3 file. I could notate the exact same rhythm in 2/4, 4/4, or even 12/8. Its all about where the accents are.

BTW does anyone else find it odd that seemingly every host insists on using fractions for time sigs?

[vincenti]

[quote="Panphobia"]Its hard to say what the time sig is without an example mp3 file. I could notate the exact same rhythm in 2/4, 4/4, or even 12/8. Its all about where the accents are.

BTW does anyone else find it odd that seemingly every host insists on using fractions for time sigs?[/quote]
What do you mean by fractions? Subdivisions?
That it always has a grid or ?

[Jafo]

Its hard to say what the time sig is without an example mp3 file. I could notate the exact same rhythm in 2/4, 4/4, or even 12/8. Its all about where the accents are.

Yes and no... x/8 is typically a triplet rhythm, and 4/4 has four beats while 2/4 has two, but these are technicalities and only important to theorists and students in theory and comp classes.

[vincenti]

[quote="Jafo"][quote="Panphobia"]Its hard to say what the time sig is without an example mp3 file. I could notate the exact same rhythm in 2/4, 4/4, or even 12/8. Its all about where the accents are.[/quote]
Yes and no... x/8 is typically a triplet rhythm, and 4/4 has four beats while 2/4 has two, but these are technicalities and only important to theorists and students in theory and comp classes.[/quote]

Well yes and no... 2/4 and 4/4 can have incredibly different sounds. I wouldn't call that a technicality :) x/8 is most often either a compound meter or a triplet meter tho but if you get to know 3/4 and 6/8 very well they differ quite a bit in sound/accenting/phrasing. Kindest regards no argumentation intended!

[michael2]

okay, playing around with a metronome app and watching some tutorial vids. I think this is in 6/8 (pretty sure at least):

seems like the counting can vary depending on what element your focusing on, but the overall feel of the count to me is 1 2 and 3, 1 2 3, 1 2 and 3, 1 2 3. am i starting to get this right?

https://soundcloud.com/rabbit-ears-motel/is-this-in-6-8

[Nanakai]

Yeah, sounds good. It's a little flat, so if you put a strong accent on the 1 and a weaker accent on the 3, it'll sound more 6/8.

[michael2]

Yeah, sounds good. It's a little flat, so if you put a strong accent on the 1 and a weaker accent on the 3, it'll sound more 6/8.

interesting, that totally makes sense to put the emphasis on the first beats. I didn't do anything with this other than pencil it in really quick while trying to figure it out. wasn't going to do anything with this beat, but maybe I'll try to write a song around it just as an exercise.

thanks.

[Panphobia]

Actually it is very common to see such things: 4/4 time: quarter quarter quarter eighth-eighth is same as 12/8 dotted quarter, dotted quarter, dotted quarter, dotted eighth dotted eighth (just to keep things simple). Depending on what genres you are used to performing. Some music uses rhythmic variations between sections or even parts, and you don't always see a meter change (so its a notational change.)

For example, the moonlight sonata (most famous classical piano piece) has triplets against dotted eighth-sixteenth. This is not some esoteric theoretical concept, but is actually quite common.

And by fractions I mean notated 2/4 instead of 2 4 without the line, one number above the other. You know, like a math fraction. Maybe a little nit picky I guess, I just find it strange. I guess its because host programs are made by computer nerds not music nerds.

Anyway this is said in the spirit of freindly discussion of course. And I will agree to agree that MOST of the time, you can tell by subdivisions (trips vs dupes etc) and accents.

Oh and I hear the given example in 3/8. Nice beat.

[vincenti]

Loving the beat man, I hear this in 3/8 as well.

[michael2]

okay, really trying hard to get this concept. can you guys tell me how you hear it in 3/8? how are you counting? is it different than how I counted it above? fascinating as someone else told me that they heard it in 6/4.

thanks on the nice comments about the beat itself.

[vincenti]

[quote="michael2"]okay, really trying hard to get this concept. can you guys tell me how you hear it in 3/8? how are you counting? is it different than how I counted it above? fascinating as someone else told me that they heard it in 6/4.

thanks on the nice comments about the beat itself. :)[/quote]
Sure, if we start on 11 seconds in when the first pad chord is played and you count 123 123 then the next chord plays on the 1 after those 6 beats. So it's usually one(kick)two three(kick),one(kick)two three(kick)[chord pad change!)((kick two kick, kick two kick) so it could be considered 6/8 or any multiple of that. But I usually hear everything in the smallest common denominator when I try to figure stuff like that out. There's a way to hear this in 6/4 and 6/8 is "the same thing technically" but I feel this as a triplet rhythm and then 6/8(3/8 would be closer to the technically "correct" one. But if people hear it as 6/4 they aren't hearing it as a triplet rhythm. Both of those are right tho, thats just a perceptive thing, it's like if you hear the beats "equally" or if you hear the beats accented like 1! (2) (3) 1!(2) (3)**triplets** or if you hear it 1 2 3 1 2 3, really is just a matter of how the listener percieves it. Hope that helps

[michael2]

okay, really trying hard to get this concept. can you guys tell me how you hear it in 3/8? how are you counting? is it different than how I counted it above? fascinating as someone else told me that they heard it in 6/4.

thanks on the nice comments about the beat itself.

Sure, if we start on 11 seconds in when the first pad chord is played and you count 123 123 then the next chord plays on the 1 after those 6 beats. So it's usually one(kick)two three(kick),one(kick)two three(kick)[chord pad change!)((kick two kick, kick two kick) so it could be considered 6/8 or any multiple of that. But I usually hear everything in the smallest common denominator when I try to figure stuff like that out. There's a way to hear this in 6/4 and 6/8 is "the same thing technically" but I feel this as a triplet rhythm and then 6/8(3/8 would be closer to the technically "correct" one. But if people hear it as 6/4 they aren't hearing it as a triplet rhythm. Both of those are right tho, thats just a perceptive thing, it's like if you hear the beats "equally" or if you hear the beats accented like 1! (2) (3) 1!(2) (3)**triplets** or if you hear it 1 2 3 1 2 3, really is just a matter of how the listener percieves it. Hope that helps

okay I understand that. is it safe to assume that most people count the time by the overall sound then instead of the beat? guess I should try writing something in another time, but starting with the melodic content instead of the beat.

[Nystul]

okay, really trying hard to get this concept. can you guys tell me how you hear it in 3/8? how are you counting? is it different than how I counted it above? fascinating as someone else told me that they heard it in 6/4.

thanks on the nice comments about the beat itself.

Sure, if we start on 11 seconds in when the first pad chord is played and you count 123 123 then the next chord plays on the 1 after those 6 beats. So it's usually one(kick)two three(kick),one(kick)two three(kick)[chord pad change!)((kick two kick, kick two kick) so it could be considered 6/8 or any multiple of that. But I usually hear everything in the smallest common denominator when I try to figure stuff like that out. There's a way to hear this in 6/4 and 6/8 is "the same thing technically" but I feel this as a triplet rhythm and then 6/8(3/8 would be closer to the technically "correct" one. But if people hear it as 6/4 they aren't hearing it as a triplet rhythm. Both of those are right tho, thats just a perceptive thing, it's like if you hear the beats "equally" or if you hear the beats accented like 1! (2) (3) 1!(2) (3)**triplets** or if you hear it 1 2 3 1 2 3, really is just a matter of how the listener percieves it. Hope that helps

okay I understand that. is it safe to assume that most people count the time by the overall sound then instead of the beat? guess I should try writing something in another time, but starting with the melodic content instead of the beat.

Obviously this is not a pure science and the "correct" answer is going to depend on your musical experience. To me, your posted example feels like 6/4. Based on the kick alone, it could 3 or 6. But the kick and brush combined clearly suggest a 6 beat measure, and the chords agree with that. I would not call it 6/8 because it is slower than any music I associate with 6/8. Let's say if you were marching to a "typical" 6/8 beat it should be 2 steps per measure. On the car radio today I heard "Crazy" by Aerosmith... that kind of ballad is about as slow as you can go and still be 6/8 in my opinion.

[michael2]

okay, really trying hard to get this concept. can you guys tell me how you hear it in 3/8? how are you counting? is it different than how I counted it above? fascinating as someone else told me that they heard it in 6/4.

thanks on the nice comments about the beat itself.

Sure, if we start on 11 seconds in when the first pad chord is played and you count 123 123 then the next chord plays on the 1 after those 6 beats. So it's usually one(kick)two three(kick),one(kick)two three(kick)[chord pad change!)((kick two kick, kick two kick) so it could be considered 6/8 or any multiple of that. But I usually hear everything in the smallest common denominator when I try to figure stuff like that out. There's a way to hear this in 6/4 and 6/8 is "the same thing technically" but I feel this as a triplet rhythm and then 6/8(3/8 would be closer to the technically "correct" one. But if people hear it as 6/4 they aren't hearing it as a triplet rhythm. Both of those are right tho, thats just a perceptive thing, it's like if you hear the beats "equally" or if you hear the beats accented like 1! (2) (3) 1!(2) (3)**triplets** or if you hear it 1 2 3 1 2 3, really is just a matter of how the listener percieves it. Hope that helps

okay I understand that. is it safe to assume that most people count the time by the overall sound then instead of the beat? guess I should try writing something in another time, but starting with the melodic content instead of the beat.

Obviously this is not a pure science and the "correct" answer is going to depend on your musical experience. To me, your posted example feels like 6/4. Based on the kick alone, it could 3 or 6. But the kick and brush combined clearly suggest a 6 beat measure, and the chords agree with that. I would not call it 6/8 because it is slower than any music I associate with 6/8. Let's say if you were marching to a "typical" 6/8 beat it should be 2 steps per measure. On the car radio today I heard "Crazy" by Aerosmith... that kind of ballad is about as slow as you can go and still be 6/8 in my opinion.

every time someone replies to this thread,I feel like I have more and more to learn (more in depth than I thought). now I have to listen to that song as I have never even noticed that it wasn't in 4/4. what boggles my mind is that in high school I did my time with Rush and Yes, and still don't even notice this stuff.