lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: grouping in 6/8


From: Simon Albrecht
Subject: Re: grouping in 6/8
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2017 22:58:32 +0200

Am 23.04.2017 um 22:23 schrieb Michael Käppler:
Hi Karol,
it depends on which rhythmical structure you want to express.
If you intend a base structure in 8ths where the 4th note is not stressed, I would prefer (2). If you want to achieve a base structure in dotted 8ths, like a 12/16 signature divided in four beats, I would write (1).

12/16 is a distinct time signature (favoured e.g. by Bach), however a proper 6/8 time may also feature situations where 16 16 16 8. grouping makes more sense. It really is a matter of style/rhythmic feel. (Though many engravers would be stricter than I about per-beat grouping.)

Best, Simon


HTH,
Michael

Am 23.04.2017 um 21:52 schrieb Karol Majewski:
Hi, which grouping is better:

6/8: c16 c16 c16 c8.~ c4.

or

6/8: c16 c16 c6 c16~ c8~ c4.


Couldn't find the answer in "Behind Bars".

-Best
KM



_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user



_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]