geeky time signature query:

depending on who I talk to, it is either possible and common or impossible and senseless to have time signatures where the denominator (? bottom number) isn't 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32 etc.

All the software I've tried rejects these, but a mate of mine said he managed to get 17/9 into FruityLoops. He played me back evidence, and while I don't know if it was in 17/9, it didn't sound common rhythmically either.

So yeah, can you have these weird time signatures, and what do they do?

 

yes you can, but the only ones I can think of are like 6 or 12 for triplets

5
12 = 5 triplets... in theory all numbers are possible and be could use to achieve odd
placement of natrual accents.

software limits me sometimes too... good luck with findinf a program to fit your needs.

PEAACe

 

I really don't think you can have a 17/5 or anything like that. We were just talking about this in music theory. In theory you can do just about everything, like triple sharps and quadruple flats if you really want to, but there still is a slight limit. The "top" number is relative to beats, and the bottom is relative to note value (As I'm sure you already know.) 5/12 can indicate triplets, but more often then not it's just pointing towards a three-time of some sort. I really don't think you can have anything over 5, just because I don't know any "5" note.

 

Like Friendofthedevil said, the bottom number indicates the note value. Note value divisions are 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, ... I suppose you could do something really bizarre like make "5" the denominator, but what then? A dotted whole note gets one beat? Odd time sigs can be complicated enough as they are; why make things even more so unnecessarily?

At any rate, odd time signatures are lots of fun!

 

Because 4/4 is gay.

I can see how they would work in theory, but it's mind-numbing trying to work it out. I guess they could be useful used in tandem with standard time signatures: say you have a piece of 4/4 and want to add a melody line with a waltz feel, with five notes to every bar of 4/4. That might be 3/5.

It seems hideously confusing, but if it's possible to do I want to do it. I'm just that kind of person.

 

4/4 doesn't have to be gay... It's all about creative arrangements. Zappa's "Black Page" is a slow 4/4, and that's one of the scariest pieces I've heard in a long time.

I'm not sure I understand where you're going with your example, but it sounds interesting! A constant polyrhythm 5:4 in 4/4 time + a waltz melody in 3/4 (or 12/8?) = lots of polymetric goodness! Am I close?

I still don't see how you would notate a "5th" note (the denominator in the time signature), or why you would need to for the example you gave.

 

It wasn't something I was planning to attempt. But since I started the thread I've seen some of these odd time signatures used in stuff about Frank Zappa and Conlon Nancarrow. The latter using the 3/5 example in amid other time signatures, and a quote attributed to Zappa, using 23/24 as an example of "rhythmic dissonance".

The Nancarrow thing bears out my theory better. Basically, a denominator which is not 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 etc. (there's a word for these numbers. Is it 2-root? Why can't I fucking remember it?!) could be used to indicate a polyrhythm, as you've indicated above. It seems more likely though that they've just used a slash instead of a colon. What exactly does it signify in what you posted? My avant garde knowhow is patchy at best.

I see where you're coming from re: 4/4, but you can do that with any other time signature too. I've always found 5/4 more enjoyable, especially in jams. Much to everyone else's annoyance, natch.

 

I played a piece one time (modern music) that was in some weird thing like 5/3 or something...I didn't know how to count it and it made my orchestra conductor mad.

 

Did they expect you to just pick it up? Weird. Opinion does just seem to be polarised: to some it's completely impossible and makes no sense, to others it's really common and you're stupid if you don't get it. I hate music.

 

I think you can basically call any time signature by a few different names. Eg 3/4 or 9/8 are basically the same feel, just if you were changing the same piece of music from one to the other, 9/8 would be written as half the tempo, with semi-quavers substituting quavers etc. All of the available permutations can be written in terms of the available standard time signatures, using different note lengths - I THINK!!! (God this is confusing!!). You could have 3/5 if you liked, but surely the composition would be better understood in 3/8 or 3/4 using quintets for each beat?? I dunno - it's difficult to get your head round!

 

Nah mate, 12/8 is the equivalent of 3/4. You could play a 9/8 pattern over a bar of 3/4 but that's basically just triplets.

I spoke to one of my tutors today, she says what a lot of people have said: time signatures with irregular denominators are used, but why bother?

"Why bother?"

To me, that's a terrible attitude for an artist to have.

 

powers of 2?

Your exampel numebrs are 2^0, 2^1, 2^2, 2^3, 2^4, respectively

 

That's the badger! I wasn't sure about 1, but yeah, makes sense.

 

Mate, 12/8 is 4/4 triplet time! 9/8 is a 3/4 triplet time. It's the same effect no matter how you write it. A 4/4 bar with four sets of triplets = 12/8!!

Your tutor means you can simulate irregular denominators with standard time signatures. Which is what I was trying to say before (rather inarticulately).

 

Maybe it's just for ease of notation then: if the majority of the piece uses quintuplets or whatever. I don't know though. I'll ask our proper avant gardist tutor tomorrow, if he actually bothers to show his face.

 

Artistic types are always more concerned with other things!

Never mind odd sigs - maybe he's just odd!

 

Indeed.

As Zappa pointed out: 4/4 gets you laid.

 

Yeah, my avant-garde knowhow has gotten patchier over the years since I was in school and "in tune" with stuff like that.

Could be that the / vs. : is just a matter of taste; I don't know that there's a "right" way to write it. I usually use colons to describe polyrhythms in regular writing and save the slashes for time sigs (time/note value), since I can't very well describe time sigs in their "proper" notation.

I prefer odd times to 4/4 as well; 5/4 and 7/8 are probably my favorites; maybe that's why I never get laid!

Great Zappa quotes, BTW...

 

Not to be argumenative, but I'd think a truely artistic type would want to discover the means by which (s)he could make his/her art truely creative, which, in a musical context would be learning odd time signatures as well as learning as much theory as (s)he possibly could. Most of my favorite bands use odd meter shifts. A simple time is very monotonous (but can be enjoyable, don't get me wrong, I love classic rock). If you want to make a song that is simply going to live on forever, though, you might want to stay in common time or denominators of double multiples, because they're easier to follow for the untrained ear.

In 6/8 you'd be using a compound time signature. Instead of using 6 eighth notes per measure, you'd divide 6 by 3. There would be 2 beats per measure. The beated note is always going to be dotted in a compound (odd) signature, and will always be three times the bottom number. Therefore, in 6/8 time, you'd divide 6 by 3 and get 2. You now know that you have 2 beats in the measure. The beat note is going to be a dotted quarter note simply because a dotted quarter note (3 eighth notes) is three times an eighth note. Therefore, in 6/8 you're playing 2 groupings of 3 8th notes.

If it's a numerator over 6 and a denominator that is any multiple of three then it's a compound time signature. If it's a numerator of any number and a denominator that is a multiple of 2 (doubled), it's a simple time. As far as my understanding serves, these are the only possible groupings in Western music.

I hope this helped, Self.

 

3/4 = x . x . x .
6/8 = x . . x . .
Usually, any way.

This kinda steers away from what I was asking though. I understand that Western music only traditionally uses root-2 denominator time signatures, and that music which used irregular denominators would sound weird.

That's kind of what I was shooting for.