Subject: [linux-audio-dev] Re: XAP: a polemic
From: vanDongen-Gilcher (gml_AT_xs4all.nl)
Date: Wed Dec 18 2002 - 18:40:33 EET
I just had to come out of lurk mode for this:
tim wrote:
> all of them.
>
> rhythmn is always based on one integral periodic 'pulse'. if
> time is not divisible by this atom, there is no musical time.
Nancarow, Ives, Stockhausen, Xenakis, Boulez, Schaeffer, Henry etc. etc in
the classical field
Taylor, Sun Ra, Ornette Coleman, Coltrane, Mengelberg, Broetzman, Zorn,
Ayler etc etc in jazz/impro
lots of ambient stuff that I don't know the names of.
lots of acapella vocal music from various cultures.
There can be easily multiple time-frames going happening in a single piece
of music that have non-lineair relationships.
A computer can also be used to make sounds that a player cannot make.
A sequencer/daw will also be used for non-musical ordering of sounds in
time. It might be handy to use an extended beat/measure structure for
setting event frames for dialog editing for a radio play.
BTW measure are much more complicated than just A/B. Even a 6/8 is really 2/
2.6666666.... in a way. Unless it is divided differently. See Brahms for
nice examples of playing with the groupings of eight notes in 4/4.
The notation x/y is just a shorthand in classical music _notation_, that
only becomes meaningfull in the context of other notation parameters, such
a note-beam groupings etc.
So notating 17/16 instead of 4.25/4 is fine, because the score gives the
grouping information. (to the player and conductor)
Although I have written (4+1/2) / 4 because I wanted to mae sure that the
piece s counted that way and not in 9/8 (=3+3+3).
Anyway my point is that the A/B concept of measure if only really relevant
if your dealing with western _notation_, and then together with the entire
score.
going back to lurk mode now
Gerard
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Dec 18 2002 - 17:42:40 EET