Default Time Stretch
I was checking fermatas... their default time stretch is 1.00 (that's actually no time-stretching).
My suggestion is not a super duper one but what if elements which have time stretch ( talking about those which have no time stretching in default ) had as default a number between 3.0-5.0 (I believe those are good enough, what do you think?) ?
Also... make fermatas time-stretching work in cases like in the screenshot (I tested and saw that even with a number >1.0 it doesn't time-stretch).
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Screenshot from 2020-06-02 21-07-53.png | 21.69 KB |
Comments
That is definitely too long for fermatas, 1.5 to 3 might be appropriate
In reply to That is definitely too long… by Jojo-Schmitz
Fermatas usually make a note be played for like 2x or 3x the default duration... that's what I have learned... if 1.5 is fine so be it. I find 3 decent. 5... never tested so perhaps it's too long. But this suggestion isn't only for fermatas... if there are other symbols with similar function then it should be applied to them too if possible.
In reply to Fermatas usually make a note… by [DELETED] 32872726
Nope, 1.5 - 2 is common and 2 the usual maximum. Which other symbols?
We have several fermatas, very short, short, normal, long, very long
So 1.25, 1.5, 2, 2.5 and 3 might be suitable defaults for those I guess
In reply to Nope, 1.5 - 2 is common and… by Jojo-Schmitz
"Which other symbols"? : I am not an expert in composing but I just thought that the possibility of other symbols with similar function may exist.
Also I still believe fermatas should make the notes be played 1.5-2x more times of the written duration : for example...
A quarter with fermata will be hold for a half and maximum a half with a dot.
In reply to "Which other symbols"? : I… by [DELETED] 32872726
If that number, 1.5 makes it so long then ok. If not... Well you still decide. But I give my opinion if you want to consider it.
In reply to If that number, 1.5 makes… by [DELETED] 32872726
My proposal would make a normal fermata having a stretch of 2
In reply to Nope, 1.5 - 2 is common and… by Jojo-Schmitz
The default should stay as it is. If you have a score with say 20 instruments it is standard practice to have a fermata in each part. During playback the time stretch used is the longest of any of the fermatas. Therefore you usually adjust the time stretch on only one, on the top staff say. If the default time stretch is perhaps 1.5 but you want to use 1.3 you would have to adjust all 20 fermatas. If the default is 1 you only have to lengthen one fermata.
There is no accepted default length of a fermata and so in most cases the time stretch will need to be adjusted to a user's taste anyway. They may as well adjust it from a starting value of 1 as any from any other default.
In reply to The default should stay as… by SteveBlower
True
In reply to The default should stay as… by SteveBlower
:o Good point...
I have a middle solution: I believe everyone will accept the fact that a fermata will , THE MINIMUM, double the duration of a note ( quarter with fermata = a half ,THE MINIMUM ) ... I'm saying this because history has proved most composers put fermatas to double (the minimum again) the duration of a note.
If somebody disagrees then they don't know what a fermata is (sorry if I'm wrong). But seriously fermatas should be AT LEAST at time stretch=1.5. I CANNOT imagine who would want LESS!
Sorry... xD
In reply to :o Good point... I have a… by [DELETED] 32872726
I know it's not a groundbreaking idea...but implemting many ideas which save just a bit of time will end saving A LOT of it. (Just like people give few money ,each, to organizations like ... Church? HAHA jking)
In reply to I know it's not a… by [DELETED] 32872726
Also such ideas make musescore more elegant and sophisticated in my opinion.
In reply to :o Good point... I have a… by [DELETED] 32872726
everyone will accept the fact that a fermata will , THE MINIMUM, double the duration of a note
Definitely not!
Read again, there is no accepted standard. And 1.5 of what in case of multiple fermatas on the last note of several staves, is those note don't have the same duration? 1.5 times a whole or 1.5 times a quarter?
In reply to Read again, there is no… by Jojo-Schmitz
Yes I said I might be wrong. But whenever I see performers performing (lol) notes with fermatas, they always do the actual duration x1.5 the minimum.
In reply to Yes I said I might be wrong… by [DELETED] 32872726
They do (or ought to to) what the conductor says. Fermatas are at his/her command and discretion...
And again. 1.5 of what? The longest note or the shortest note, or some middle ground?
Unless you're talking of soloists, just one instrument in the score
In reply to They do (or ought to to)… by Jojo-Schmitz
Wait cause I didn't understand that sentence ... What do you mean shortest/longest or middle ground?
I thought a fermata would double (minimum) the duration of EVERY kind of note.
In reply to Wait cause I didn't… by [DELETED] 32872726
Have an orchestral score. Last note of Tuba is a whole wuth a fermata, last note of flite is a quarter with a fermata, last note of horn is a half with a fermata. What time stretch to apply now?
You can't double them all, as all need to end at the same spot
In reply to Have an orchestral score… by Jojo-Schmitz
Wa-halt I never saw that, but usually in orchestral scores all instruments at the same time will have the same duration if a fermata is above the note. To be honest I don't know if my suggestion would affect that... The horn would end where it ends , the other where it ends too etc
In reply to Wa-halt I never saw that,… by [DELETED] 32872726
No, sure not. They have a fermata on the last note of every instrument, but those notes do not have to have the same duration and more often than not don't.
Take a choral + piano, the choir often ending with a series or tied whole notes, the last of which with a fermata, the piano with and couple quarter notes chord, the last of with with a fermata. Very common
In reply to No, sure not. They have a… by Jojo-Schmitz
Wait... I seriously have never seen that... But still would my idea affect that in a bad way? (For such topic there is too much traffic xD)
In reply to Wait... I seriously have… by [DELETED] 32872726
It is very common.
Common enough to buy @SteverBlower's argument given further up that a default of 1 is the best we can have
In reply to It is very common. Common… by Jojo-Schmitz
I believe the best is 1.5 (but doesn't matter if the concept of the suggestion makes so many disagreements)
In reply to Wait cause I didn't… by [DELETED] 32872726
But fermatas usually are applied on quarters, Halfs and wholes (rarely on eigths? Are not at all)
I don't believe anybody would want it at less than 1.5 ... If you think you can find somebody who would put it less (1.5 to 1.3 is not huge difference even for wholes I believe) then just scrap this whole story xD
In reply to But fermatas usually are… by [DELETED] 32872726
Again: 1.5 of what, the whole, the half or the quarter note at the end of an orchestral score?
1.5 or 2 would be fine on a single instrument score, but that'd be about it
In reply to Again: 1.5 of what, the… by Jojo-Schmitz
I think a fermata has the same effect on every duration.
In reply to I think a fermata had the… by [DELETED] 32872726
1.5 times a quarter is not the same as 1.5 times a whole!
So a fermata cannot have the same effect of every note, this is mathmatically impossible
And not even musicians can change that ;-)
In reply to 1.5 times a quarter is not… by Jojo-Schmitz
>.< When I meant same effect I meant it in a bit more complex way than what you think ... Mathematically:
You got a "Desired Duration":
(Desired Duration with Fermata => Desired Duration x2 )
( In this case the symbol => means "at least", you probably know it but I wouldn't understand it in this case xD)
In reply to >.< When I meant same effect… by [DELETED] 32872726
Thus I would put it at 2 no more... And if things go as I expect:
The horn for example instead of playing a quarter would play a half, the tube instead of a half would play a whole etc.
In reply to Thus I would put it at 2 no… by [DELETED] 32872726
I think the argument would be valid if the "formula" I gave was wrong. Meaning that the time stretch( of Musescore) works with another way/formula.
Like instead of having (Duration with fermata) = duration x2
You have (Duration with fermata) = duration + (SOME duration)
In the first you multiply while in the second you sum. If it is summation my theory, and my suggestion, is trash. If though it is how I think it is then it could work.
In reply to I think the argument would… by [DELETED] 32872726
I believe at this point we can put the minimum time stretch that the fermata usually sets (1-5 to 2 I think) and see what happens in your "special case".
In reply to I believe at this point we… by [DELETED] 32872726
We'd better leave it at 1, for the reasons given above numerous times
In reply to We'd better leave it at 1,… by Jojo-Schmitz
I'm fine with that but I still believe 2 wouldn't bring dissatisfaction.
In reply to I'm fine with that but I… by [DELETED] 32872726
It would cause chaos and nonsens all over the place
In reply to Thus I would put it at 2 no… by [DELETED] 32872726
The horn for example instead of playing a quarter would play a half, the tube instead of a half would play a whole etc.
So the horn would end sooner that the tuba. No way
In reply to So the horn would end sooner… by Jojo-Schmitz
But thats the logical explanation. I thought that's what you wanted. If everyone must finish the same time then all fermatas must be put on the same duration.
In reply to But thats the logical… by [DELETED] 32872726
this conservation is the happiness of a software designer
In reply to But thats the logical… by [DELETED] 32872726
then all fermatas must be put on the same duration.
Which is not what happens in existing written scores
In reply to Which is not what happens in… by Jojo-Schmitz
Then may I have a sample to understand what my suggestion may ruin? ( I mean a score of possible )
In reply to Then may I have a sample to… by [DELETED] 32872726
Looks at virtually any choral score with piano accompaniment and a fermata at the end
Most orchestral scores too
In reply to Looks at virtually any… by Jojo-Schmitz
I have never seen it, and it sounds too hard to find one. Perhaps a name of such a piece would be enough for me to search.
In reply to Then may I have a sample to… by [DELETED] 32872726
I'm going to sleep, but I wanna thank you for baring with my reasoning: I haven't exactly understood your "special case" yet but I believe I'm mathematically right. By the way right now I don't care about the feature but I still believe that special case is mathematically wrong.
In reply to I'm going to sleep, but I… by [DELETED] 32872726
my case isn't special, your's is.
Fermatas are often seen at the end of a score or movement on the last note, and those last notes are rarely of the same duration for all instruments. Some even can't hold the tone as long as you might want.
In reply to my case isn't special, your… by Jojo-Schmitz
I personally still can't imagine it (supposedly sleeping). When the composer wants every instrument to end at the same time, they put the same duration in each and every one of them. I don't believe it is special.
In reply to I personally still can't… by [DELETED] 32872726
a whole on beat 1 and a quarter on beat 4 do end at the same time, they just don't start at the same time. And a fermata on either means to watch the conductor to give the finish sign, which means a different stretch...
In reply to a whole on beat 1 and a… by Jojo-Schmitz
Not sure if it's mathematically and compositionally wrong so I will accept it.
In reply to Not sure if it's… by [DELETED] 32872726
Something about pictures and 1000 words.
![306230.png]( "306230.png")
You can bet your life that the intent is for the singers to both end at the same time, even though if each fermata had the same time stretch factor this would mathematically not be true.
In reply to Something about pictures and… by jeetee
Yes the whole should have been cut in halfs with fermata on the latter.
In reply to Yes the whole should have… by [DELETED] 32872726
In this case i 'll still believe it's the composers' fault and not mine xD (but I have the idea that stravinsky also does that... does that mean-)
In reply to In this case i 'll still… by [DELETED] 32872726
Yes stravinsky also did it... So it seems his score has a flaw after all... I'm disappointed in him and every composer who takes composing seriously ...
In reply to Yes stravinsky also did it… by [DELETED] 32872726
It's not a flaw at all; it completely valid notation and any conductor will grasp the meaning.
A fermate duration is always up to performer/conductor interpretation (even time stretch factor 1 is a valid interpretation), nowhere does it mean the time stretch for a fermate should be constant throughout a performance and the above is one of many examples where that it so.
In reply to It's not a flaw at all; it… by jeetee
I know but it still disturbs me that it is mathematically wrong.
In reply to I know but it still disturbs… by [DELETED] 32872726
Music is not math. Otherwise there wouldn't ever be such 'nonsense' as a 6/8 time sig, or even 4/4 and 2/2.
But a computer program is pure and plain math, so here it needs to be careful to not impose math onto music where it doesn't make sense.
Fermata stretch is such a place.
In reply to Music is not math. Otherwise… by Jojo-Schmitz
Ok. But time signatures don't really have any mathematical nonsense.
In reply to Ok. But time signatures don… by [DELETED] 32872726
Right now I mostly need somebody to give a defining solution to this one:
https://musescore.org/en/node/305830
In reply to Right now I mostly need… by [DELETED] 32872726
How is that related to the topic at hand here?
In reply to How is that related to the… by Jojo-Schmitz
No it's not... I just wondered if you would like to help :^D (sorry)
... After all this suggestion topic is over.
In reply to Ok. But time signatures don… by [DELETED] 32872726
6/8 is mathmatical nonsens, 3/4 is what it should be. 4/4 is simply 1, mathmatically
In reply to 6/8 is mathmatical nonsens,… by Jojo-Schmitz
But those are time signatures they are not supposed to show that you devide.
In reply to But those are time… by [DELETED] 32872726
They indeed make sense musically, but not mathematically
In reply to They indeed make sense… by Jojo-Schmitz
Okay I'll stop cause I know now what you mean and this conversation is repeating itself. (But the / still doesn't mean it's a division here so nothing mathematic to look at here, unlike the fermata case)
In reply to They indeed make sense… by Jojo-Schmitz
I'm a mathematician and I don't see why they don't make sense
In reply to I'm a mathematician and I… by frfancha
that wasn't funny if it was a joke. The fermatas like that do not make mathematical sense.
In reply to that wasn't funny if it was… by [DELETED] 32872726
I mean mathematically: the parts staves with wholes (with fermatas) will end later than the halfs with fermatas.
In reply to I'm a mathematician and I… by frfancha
You mean a 6/8 time signature? It doesn't make sens at all mathematically to have a 3/4 and a 6/8 time sig, as they are identical, mathematically (but indeed different musically)
In reply to You mean a 6/8 time… by Jojo-Schmitz
COUGH I wish we could go to the other topic COUGH TWICE