[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator
From: |
David Wright |
Subject: |
Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator |
Date: |
Wed, 2 Nov 2016 12:41:03 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Wed 02 Nov 2016 at 12:49:07 (-0400), kieren_macmillan kieren_macmillan wrote:
<some html>
I guess I had expected a reference/url/scan rather than "yes".
I realise that all sorts of "odd" notations were around in
preclassical times, But wouldn't claim to understand them.
Does the example I've given correctly express the required
relationship between the notes' durations (which is kind of what we
expect with modern music notation).
Say I write 9/6 at the start of a staff. Which glyph do I pick out of
appendix A of the NR manual to follow it with?
Cheers,
David.
- Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator, Simon Albrecht, 2016/11/01
- Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator, David Wright, 2016/11/02
- Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator, kieren_macmillan kieren_macmillan, 2016/11/02
- Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator, tisimst, 2016/11/02
- Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator, Chris Yate, 2016/11/02
- Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator, Urs Liska, 2016/11/03
- Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator, Urs Liska, 2016/11/03
- Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator, David Wright, 2016/11/03
- Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator, mclaren, 2016/11/03
- Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator, Hans Åberg, 2016/11/02
- Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator, mclaren, 2016/11/03
Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator, Hans Åberg, 2016/11/02