8th notes not separated
How can i merge this notes . Or is this not possible?
Just to make it easier for the students at this point.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Not wanted.GIF | 4.39 KB |
| wanted.GIF | 66.81 KB |
Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.
Comments
https://musescore.org/en/handbook/3/beams
FWIW, I would claim this does the opposite of making it easier. Rhythms are understood through pattern recognition, and deliberately deviating from standard patterns just makes this harder to recognize.
In reply to FWIW, I would claim this… by Marc Sabatella
i've wanted his "wanted", too, many times, and seen it in real editions even more times. Should be easier to ask for iit. The instrumental entries of the Kyrie I of the B Minor Mass (BWV 232) are exactly that.
In reply to FWIW, I would claim this… by Marc Sabatella
Please tell me why this notation is "wrong": https://musescore.com/bsg/french-overture-2019
In reply to Please tell me why this… by [DELETED] 1831606
There is nothing wrong with this notation.
Sometimes I even use beams on rest for legibility (not in classical music works) .
Sometimes using four different groups of beams (eg: one up, one down, one straight, one up again) instead of seeing it in two groups also increases legibility (readability).
It is best to allow both types of writing.
In reply to Please tell me why this… by [DELETED] 1831606
It's not wrong - different conventions predominate in different eras, and musicians accustomed to reading 17th and 18th centuries scores will be accustomed to that particular convention. But, the post here wasn't about that, it was creating music that would be simple for beginners. Unless the plan was to specifically train them for reading historical editions of Baroque music, I would suggest it's more to the point to use the standard modern conventions.
In reply to It's not wrong - different… by Marc Sabatella
I just don't believe this. In my score, as well as in the Kyrie 1, the notes are logically, structurally, and acoustically in groups of 4, not 2. Are you trying to tell me that "laa-de-bomp-bomp" or "Kyyyy-ri-e e-" is no longer used in music, or is beyond "beginners", or an incorrect or obsolete way of thinking about 4 notes in that timing relationship?
In reply to I just don't believe this… by [DELETED] 1831606
I'm just asking by wearing my devil's attorney hat (and the answer is obvious to me, but I have to deserve my lawyer fee) :)
Perhaps (without changing anything else) would this four-note grouping be more accurate if we substituted "2/2" instead of "C (4/4)"?
We can still use "quarter = nnn" as the basic metronome beat value.
In reply to *I'm just asking by wearing… by Ziya Mete Demircan
The fact that it's happy to beam 4 together if they're all equal 8ths, but not if there's a dotted pair, suggests that that's a secondary issue.
In reply to *I'm just asking by wearing… by Ziya Mete Demircan
This is indeed a distinction that would be made by some editors - to more freely accept mixed combinations of eighths and sixteenths within a single beat of 2/2 than between two beats of 4/4.
In reply to I just don't believe this… by [DELETED] 1831606
I am saying that if you check any modern edition of any recently-produced music, you will see the rule almost universally followed by editors today is, if sixteenths are present in a beat, then do not beam that beat with other beats. See for example Gould, "Behind Bars", page 153.