The Logic Off Topic list

--- In logic-ot@yahoogroups.com, steve parker <swimorsync@n...> wrote:
> > This is not the point of having irrational time signatures,
> 
> nothing about 5/5 or 3/5 etc is mathematically "irrational"...
> 
> > and furthermore is an incorrect definition of 5/5. 5/5 does exist (time=

> > signatures are just simple maths)
> 
> time sigs are •not• maths....the top is a number (granted) but the 
> bottom is a *name* - like minim or "4 or "8".
> these *names* are related to each other by composer direction - a 
> change from 2/4 to 2/8 does not imply a halving of the length of the 
> bar.
> 
It is maths.
Why is the bottom number called 2? because the breve is divided by 2
Why is the bottom number called 4? because the breve is divided by 4
Why is the bottom number called 8? because the breve is divided by 8
Why is the bottom number called 16? because the breve is divided by 16

This is very basic stuff. Take a few music lessons!
> 
> >  as do 3/5 7/5 etc. They are not
> > theoretical or open to interpretation any more than 4/4 is.
> 
> they are a kludgy way to modulate tempo.
> they lose musical distinction between stuff like 5/4 and 5/8.
> 
> time sigs PLUS tempo marks are very powerful.
> trying to make time sigs INCLUDE tempo marks or tempo gradations loses 
> time sig functionality.


Except they are impossible to realise in performance without a click track.=

> 
> like using a piccolo to crack a nut.......
> 
> all the best
> 
> steve parker
> 
> steve parker