5 ms·

This is not the case. While some inexperienced composers/arrangers/scorers may transcribe 3/4 pieces in 6/8 to make the score look better, it is a fundamentall

This is not the case. While some inexperienced composers/arrangers/scorers may transcribe 3/4 pieces in 6/8 to make the score look better, it is a fundamentally incorrect thing to do. 3/4 has one significant beat per bar: ONE two three | ONE two three - Think any waltz you've ever heard. 6/8 has two siginficant beats per bar: ONE two three Four five six | ONE to three Four five six - Think Follow the Yellow Brick Road from the Wizard of Oz, or We Are the Champions by Queen. The second down beat has less significance than the first. In this way 6/8 is like 2/4, except in triple form, not duple form. Pieces in 6/8 do not (and generally should not) feel the same as pieces written in 3/4. The only thing 3/4 and 6/8 share is the number of note-lengths that fit into a bar, which has no bearing on the feel, sound or rhythm of a piece. Sources: https://www.musictheory.net/lessons/15 https://www.musictheory.net/lessons/15 , https://www.reddit.com/r/musictheory/comments/36fn1g/i_still_cant_tell_the_difference_between_34_and_68/ https://www.reddit.com/r/musictheory/comments/36fn1g/i_still... , and own experience

pishpash 8y ago
6/8 doesn't need 2 (or any static number of) significant beats. As long as there are really 6 rhythmic atoms before the pattern repeats, it deserves a 6/x. The easiest way that happens is lcm(2,3).
- quadrangle 8y ago
  It's called convention. By convention (not by anything about the notation itself), 6/8 is used for compound time with 2 significant beats.
  - pishpash 8y ago
    You're confusing cause and effect. If you have compound time with 2 significant beats, you should see 6/8. If you see 6/8, it does not imply there are 2 significant beats.
    - DavidPiper 8y ago
      > If you have compound time with 2 significant beats, you should see 6/8. I assume you meant to write 'compound meter', in which case yes, absolutely. > If you see 6/8, it does not imply there are 2 significant beats It should. If it does not, then you'll be notating a lot of accented notes explicitly in the music to convey to the player exactly what beat formation is. If these accents are regular, this is a waste/clutter of notation because it's clear you're actually writing a piece in a time other than 6/8. If the accents are irregular, then they are likely either indicating syncopation, or they are completely irregular in which case you're deliberately writing music with a feel that cannot be accurately described by a single time signature, and you should be changing time signatures through the piece as necessary to describe the beat to the player. (Or it cannot be nicely described by the notation in use). Jacob Collier is an example of a musician who enjoys exploring this kind of music. See for example: https://youtu.be/b78NoobJNEo?t=14m40s https://youtu.be/b78NoobJNEo?t=14m40s onwards. He invented a new terminology for time signatures to accommodate his style of writing.
    - seanyeh 8y ago
      6/8 does imply 2 strong beats (at least in western classical music tradition).
nerflad 8y ago
> ONE two three | ONE two three This phrase also has two significant beats. There's just a barline in the middle. See my point?
- nerflad 8y ago
  In an effort not to be snarky, my point is that rhythm is fractal and these are essentially just two different levels of magnification. You're absolutely right that there are conventions and implications in how they are written, but the thing about conventions (let's use a software term: "best practices") is that people's opinions on what they are tend to be heterogeneous. As a jazz musician, to me the denominator is not important, as it only represents the level of magnification. The important part is that the piece is in (some multiple of) 3. I would argue that We Are The Champions is actually a 12/8 groove (conceptually triplets in 4/4). And we would both be right!
  - quadrangle 8y ago
    I agree with you, probably 100% at the end of the day. But I don't agree with your first post that seemed to tell readers that there was no distinction. The convention is that these two time signatures stand-in for two different actual perceptually different music feelings. The "tactus" (the place we feel the beat) certainly can be subjectively moved to different levels in the hierarchy. Furthermore, you're right that the bottom number is basically just a notation preference (6/8 and 6/16 are effectively identical, though nobody uses the latter). But the whole point of anyone describing the difference between 6/8 and 3/4 is that they are using the convention to describe the actual feel difference between dividing the same amount of time into 2 vs 3, the hemiola issue. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemiola https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemiola I basically was taking issue with seeing a reply to a post that was highlighting this difference that is a real perceptual one (not just a notational one, but described, unfortunately, with focus on notation) with the claim "there is no difference". I apologize for the aspects of my reply that were ad hominem instead of just critiquing the post itself.
    - nerflad 8y ago

pishpash 8y ago

6/8 doesn't need 2 (or any static number of) significant beats. As long as there are really 6 rhythmic atoms before the pattern repeats, it deserves a 6/x. The easiest way that happens is lcm(2,3).

quadrangle 8y ago
It's called convention. By convention (not by anything about the notation itself), 6/8 is used for compound time with 2 significant beats.
- pishpash 8y ago
  You're confusing cause and effect. If you have compound time with 2 significant beats, you should see 6/8. If you see 6/8, it does not imply there are 2 significant beats.
  - DavidPiper 8y ago
    > If you have compound time with 2 significant beats, you should see 6/8. I assume you meant to write 'compound meter', in which case yes, absolutely. > If you see 6/8, it does not imply there are 2 significant beats It should. If it does not, then you'll be notating a lot of accented notes explicitly in the music to convey to the player exactly what beat formation is. If these accents are regular, this is a waste/clutter of notation because it's clear you're actually writing a piece in a time other than 6/8. If the accents are irregular, then they are likely either indicating syncopation, or they are completely irregular in which case you're deliberately writing music with a feel that cannot be accurately described by a single time signature, and you should be changing time signatures through the piece as necessary to describe the beat to the player. (Or it cannot be nicely described by the notation in use). Jacob Collier is an example of a musician who enjoys exploring this kind of music. See for example: https://youtu.be/b78NoobJNEo?t=14m40s https://youtu.be/b78NoobJNEo?t=14m40s onwards. He invented a new terminology for time signatures to accommodate his style of writing.
  - seanyeh 8y ago
    6/8 does imply 2 strong beats (at least in western classical music tradition).

nerflad 8y ago

> ONE two three | ONE two three This phrase also has two significant beats. There's just a barline in the middle. See my point?

nerflad 8y ago
In an effort not to be snarky, my point is that rhythm is fractal and these are essentially just two different levels of magnification. You're absolutely right that there are conventions and implications in how they are written, but the thing about conventions (let's use a software term: "best practices") is that people's opinions on what they are tend to be heterogeneous. As a jazz musician, to me the denominator is not important, as it only represents the level of magnification. The important part is that the piece is in (some multiple of) 3. I would argue that We Are The Champions is actually a 12/8 groove (conceptually triplets in 4/4). And we would both be right!
- quadrangle 8y ago
  I agree with you, probably 100% at the end of the day. But I don't agree with your first post that seemed to tell readers that there was no distinction. The convention is that these two time signatures stand-in for two different actual perceptually different music feelings. The "tactus" (the place we feel the beat) certainly can be subjectively moved to different levels in the hierarchy. Furthermore, you're right that the bottom number is basically just a notation preference (6/8 and 6/16 are effectively identical, though nobody uses the latter). But the whole point of anyone describing the difference between 6/8 and 3/4 is that they are using the convention to describe the actual feel difference between dividing the same amount of time into 2 vs 3, the hemiola issue. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemiola https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemiola I basically was taking issue with seeing a reply to a post that was highlighting this difference that is a real perceptual one (not just a notational one, but described, unfortunately, with focus on notation) with the claim "there is no difference". I apologize for the aspects of my reply that were ad hominem instead of just critiquing the post itself.
  - nerflad 8y ago