Re: Terminology of baseMoment, beats, groups

[David Kastrup]

Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:

> Am 11.11.2017 um 12:30 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> I find "grouping" without "beat" fine.  I could have been responsible
>> for the terminology in the code (pretty sure I wasn't, but it matches
>> the terminology I use quite better).
>>
>> Now I have certainly not gotten an English music education, so can
>> someone who did chime in?
>
> I haven't either, but I can refer to Gould's terminology. While we all
> agree that no single engraving book provides "the truth", it is surely
> a good idea to match her terminology, if only to be able to
> communicate with users/developers of other programs.
>
> She says: "Divisions of a beat are beamed together in all metres." and
> states 2/4, 6/8, and 2/2 as metres of 2 beats. (p. 153, "Beaming
> according to the metre")

I'd be interested in her take on the terminology for uneven
subdivisions, like the 3+3+2 used these days in tango.

> 3/2, and 9/16 are given as examples of metres of 3 beats.
>
> So it's clear that her terminology matches that of beatStructure,
> "beat" = "beat" and "baseMoment" = "Division of a beat".
>
> The example I gave is also present in her examples (p. 155), other
> examples of metres with beats of different lengths include 5/16 (2+3
> or 3+2) and 7/8.

Ah, ok.

> So I think we can safely say the terminology of beatStructure is
> correct (or at least acceptable).
>
> "Beat" also refers to what a conductor would do. the 3+3+2 from my
> example would be given as three "beats" by the conductor. Maybe your
> perception of "beat" as necessarily regular comes from the fact that
> in German we use "beat" too, but usually referring to specific styles
> that are limited to regular beats ...

I actually perform quite a bit in 4/4 with a basic rhythm of { 4. 4. 4
}, but I've never heard anybody refer to the last quarter as the "third
beat" when directing musicians where to start.

-- 
David Kastrup