Compound Time

[`NeXxuS`]

Fairly simple Q:

I think that when writing in Compound time the bpm is actually the pulse per minute correct?

its not actually beats per minute in compound time is it?

[Corwinoid]

^ When referring to tempo, beats/pulses are interchangable; they become distinct when talking about how the meter is felt. 6/4 has 6 pulses, but is felt with 4 beats (a strong beat one 1, a strong beat on 4, and two hidden beats that fall between 2 and 3, and 5 and 6).

For tempo purposes, the 'beat' is always the fundamental subdivision, ie. 6/4 - the quarter note is the fundamental division, so you measure tempo based on the timing of each quarter note (or each pulse). But for tempo, it's still called a beat.

[`NeXxuS`]

^ did u mean to say 6 4 has 2 beats?

cause im taught there is 2 beats in 6 time. and thats why we beam a bar the way we do... 12 time would be 4 beats...

but you answered my Q: thx

[seljer]

To what I remember: compound time more than one emphasized beat per bar, so everything that isn't X/3 and X/2 which only have 1 emphasized beat per bar

in 4/4 for example you have the empahsis on this first beat, but also a less emphasis on the 3rd beat.

in 6/8 like mentioned above you can group them together however you want depending on the song (into 3 parts with emphasis in the 1st,3rd and 5th beats or into 2 parts with empahsis on the 1st and 4th beats....or if you're crazy in some other fashion)



as far as the bpm goes....isn't it normally written like this anyway where you can cleary see the duration that the bpm reffering too?:

[`NeXxuS`]

im seeing it marked as MM = X and also as bpm = X.


and im also taught that theres 3 types of timing for Compound and Simple time

Duple, Triple and Quadruple, and that any time in 6 is considered duple, while 9 is triple...

anyways, im taught that you cant have 3 beats in 6 time, only 2.

Im wondering if later that rule goes out the door?

[Corwinoid]

Holy jesus... this really isn't that complex.

Time signatures and metronome markings/tempo are _completely_, completely unrelated.

The time signature tells you what the basic subdivision of a measure is, how it's counted, and how it will be felt. Forget about compound shnizzlelicks for now, it's irrelevant to what you asked.

The metronome marking tells you how fast a certain note value passes, ie. what duration a note of whatever has. Normally, and by default, the metronome note value defaults to the basic subdivision. If it's not the basic subdivision, then it's notated (Q = 120, for instance, as in the image selger posted).

The meter of a measure does NOT effect the metronome setting, all it effects is how you count and play the measure.

Stop confusing the two. For what you're asking, treat the words 'beat' and 'pulse' as meaning exactly the same thing.

[gpb0216]

Fairly simple Q: I think that when writing in Compound time the bpm is actually the pulse per minute correct? its not actually beats per minute in compound time is it?Time signatures fall into one of two categories: those indicating simple time and those which indicate compund time.

* In simple time beats naturally divide into two parts.
* In compound time beats naturally divide into three parts.

The time signature immediately follows the key signature. It consists of two numbers, one above the other.

* If the time signature's upper number is 6, 9, 12, 15 or 18, the signature represents compound time.
* Any upper number other than 6, 9, 12, 15 or 18 puts the time signature into the simple time category. The most common upper numbers in simple time signatures are 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8. Others are possible but are rare.

In simple time the upper number directly indicates the number of beats per measure. These beats naturally divide into two equal parts.

In compound time you divide the upper number by 3 to determine the number of beats per measure. These beats naturally divide into three equal parts.

In simple time the lower number directly indicates the type of note that receives the beat, also known as the beat unit.

* If the lower number is 1, the whole-note receives the beat.
* If the lower number is 2, the half-note is the beat unit.
* If the lower number is 4, the quarter-note receives the beat.
* If the lower number is 8, the eighth-note is the beat unit.
* And finally, if the lower number is 16, the sixteenth-note receives the beat (relatively rare).

The lower number in compound time identifies the division of the beat unit. Remember, in compound time the beat naturally divides into three equal parts. Therefore, three of the note types the compound time signature's lower number specifies constitute one beat.

* If the lower number is 1, three whole-notes constitute one beat (extremely rare).
* If the lower number is 2, three half-notes constitute one beat.
* If the lower number is 4, three quarter-notes constitute one beat.
* If the lower number is 8, three eighth-notes constitute one beat.
* And finally, if the lower number is 16, three sixteenth-notes constitute one beat.

[Corwinoid]

I cannot ****ing believe you sent me a ****ing PM arguing the definition of what a ****ing beat vs. a pulse is, when you can't even get your definition of simple time right.

Anybody with the slightest ****ing clue, even the very very very slightest will realize that any asymetrical meter (with a non-evenly divisable value as the upper number) is compound irregular.

With that said, let me clarify for you exactly why we have two different words that mean almost exactly the same thing in theory: Because they mean almost the same thing.

Way way back in the day, even before you were born, we had something called mensural notation. In mensural music, there was no meter, no barline, no measure. The breve/semi-breve were divided into either two or three equal parts; when the B:sb ration was 3:1, the mensural system was said to be perfect, when it was 2:1 it was imperfect.

Music was most often measured by either the heartbeat, or by the breath. That's important, we'll come back to it.

During the 17th century, as music and notation was being revolutionized, 'perfect' mensurality was being left at the wayside for the 'simpler' imperfect notation. It's important to note, that although it was most common for a piece to be notated in simpler meters, that composers -usually- expected their performers to perform as if the piece were mensurally perfect. Meaning, a piece in 4/4 would often be played as if it were in 9/8 -- this is a practice that lasted well into the 18th century.

Remember how music use to be counted by either the breath, or the heartbeat? Yes, well, a pulse is the literal division of the mensural period; the beat is the halved tempus, regardless of its perfection or imperfection. A tempus perfectum could still have a prolatio imperfectum, meaning that the beat would occlude the pulse -- this is what we consider simple meter today. The combination of tempus perfectum, and prolatio perfectum, where the [heart] beat was a perfect division of the tempus is what we consider compound meter today.

This means that regardless of the duration or count of the pulse, the beat is the even division of the metric. As the development of the metronome, and the addition of strict tempi, the distinction between what a beat and a pulse is has become less and less understood -- to the point where most dictionaries will use them synonymously. But there is a clear distinction between the two.

How does that affect music today?

The beat is the even division of a greater metric by two. In simple time the fundamental is broken exactly in half: In 3/4, 4/4, 6/4, etc. the fundamental is the quarter note, and each subdivision of the meter gets exactly half of the fundamental . In compound time, each pulse is grouped by three units of the fundamental -- 6/8, 9/8, 12/8. In compound time, there are -two- distinct 'measures' that are felt within each bar -- the grouping by pulse, AND the division by beat -- this is why it's compound time.

I'd like to take a second, to point out, that you did point out an actual error in what I said in my first post. My examples should have been in 6/8, not 6/4. In 6/4, the beat occludes the pulse, which means the beat is felt more strongly. In 6/8, compound time, the two pulses are both divided evenly by beats; because the beat does not occlude the pulse, the pulse is felt more strongly, but the beat is still felt.

If you are going to use the terms beat and pulse, they should not be confused as being synonymous. While they're very similar in current language, they have very distinct implications to how the measure is felt. It's even more abusive to see the distinction between simple and compopund meters, and twice as so to fail to see a distinction between compound irregular, and simple meters.

For the purpose of using a metronome, the terms should be forgotten, completely. If a metronome marking carries with it the value of each tick, ie. 8th = xx, or quarter = xx, then the marking is explicit; if it does not, then, as a general rule, the marking refers to the value of the basic grouping, either the beat, or the pulse's grouping by three.

[gpb0216]

I don't have any idea what your problem is, but your explanation of compound time is simply wrong. I sent you a PM to avoid embarrassing you in public, but apparently you'd have none of it. I urge you to get some professional instruction regarding simple and compound time. I won't look for an apology, but perhaps you'll be man enough to offer one once you get your facts straight.

All the best,
gpb

[Corwinoid]

^ This from somebody who suggests 5/4, 7/4, or 5/8 are 'simple meter'?

I won't even bother explaining to you why you look like a fool right now.

[`NeXxuS`]

all groupings that arent divisible by 2 or 3 are hybrid time are they not?

[Corwinoid]

^ Compound Irregular, not 'hybrid'

[gpb0216]

^ This from somebody who suggests 5/4, 7/4, or 5/8 are 'simple meter'? I won't even bother explaining to you why you look like a fool right now.By definition, any meter other than compound is simple. This is a fact easily verifiable in any basic music theory text. The one I'm looking at right now is the one I used in my first-year college theory course, Basic Materials in Music Theory by the late Paul O. Harder, but any basic theory text will support what I'm telling you.

The bottom line is, yes, 5/4, 7/4 and 5/8 are, by definition, simple time.

Of equal importance is the fact that, in compound time, we divide the top number in the time signature by three to determine the number of beats per measure. It's just that simple. The bottom number represents the division of the beat unit. In the example I presented in the PM to which you're referring, a time signature of 12/8 indicates four beats to the measure, with three eighth-notes comprising one beat.

I encourage anyone reading this post to verify what I'm presenting here. Time signatures are not complicated. You owe it to yourself to take the time and effort to understand them thoroughly.

I won't dignify your insult with a response. Just get the facts and move on.

[Corwinoid]

^ Go ****ing google "compound irregular"

I don't have time for this bull****

[gpb0216]

^ Go ****ing google "compound irregular"

I don't have time for this bull****You apparently don't have the time to understand the basic definitions of simple and compound time, either. I can see how, being god and all, there's a lot riding on your being right every single time. In this case, however, your crown has slipped. Look it up and move on, and be more careful next time, please.

[Corwinoid]

^ Hey look... I'll leave it for everybody else. Anybody interested in making an educated decision... don't take my word for it.

Don't listen to anything I've said in this entire discussion; ignore me completely.

I want you to read gpb's posts very very carefully. Then I want you to google "simple meter" "compound meter" and "compound irregular" and read for yourselves.

I'm serious... ignore absolutely everything I've said, and don't trust a word of it. Go educate yourselves, and learn for yourselves exactly what we're discussion. Then form your own educated opinions about simple meter, compount meter, and compound irregular meters.

Ed: I won't even provide links, because obviously I could find biased ones I'll give you google though; www.google.com

I would hate to poison the well of information by failing to link to a single site or person that supports him on this. So I won't, you guys can do your own research.

[Quadque72]

Anybody with the slightest ****ing clue, even the very very very slightest will realize that any asymetrical meter (with a non-evenly divisable value as the upper number) is compound irregular.

I don't understand. Are you saying 3/4 is not a simple time?

[`NeXxuS`]

^no hes not...

3 is divisible by 3... but something like 5 is a prime number and cant be divided by 2 or 3

[gpb0216]

^no hes not...3 is divisible by 3... but something like 5 is a prime number and cant be divided by 2 or 3

Some contributors to this thread have apparently confused the categories of simple and compound time with the various practical manifestations of those categories.

This is actually quite straightforward, so I'll post once more, and then I'm done with this topic.

This thread started with this post:
Fairly simple Q: I think that when writing in Compound time the bpm is actually the pulse per minute correct? its not actually beats per minute in compound time is it?Please note that this question involves compound time only, and the only reason I replied at all was because this response...

When referring to tempo, beats/pulses are interchangable; they become distinct when talking about how the meter is felt. 6/4 has 6 pulses, but is felt with 4 beats (a strong beat one 1, a strong beat on 4, and two hidden beats that fall between 2 and 3, and 5 and 6). For tempo purposes, the 'beat' is always the fundamental subdivision, ie. 6/4 - the quarter note is the fundamental division, so you measure tempo based on the timing of each quarter note (or each pulse). But for tempo, it's still called a beat....is factually incorrect through and through.

By the numbers:

1) 6/4 has 6 pulses, but is felt with 4 beats (a strong beat one 1, a strong beat on 4, and two hidden beats that fall between 2 and 3, and 5 and 6).

This statement does not even remotely resemble reality. A measure 6/4 time consists of two beats / pulses, each consisting of three quarter-notes (or their equivalents). 6/4 (and 6/2, 6/8, 6/16, etc.) is absolutely never felt with four beats. It simply never happens. 6/4 is felt in two, with beat #1 strong and beat #2 weak, period.

2. For tempo purposes, the 'beat' is always the fundamental subdivision, ie. 6/4 - the quarter note is the fundamental division, so you measure tempo based on the timing of each quarter note (or each pulse). But for tempo, it's still called a beat.

In 6/4 time the beat unit is the dotted half-note, equal to three quarter-notes, and you in fact measure the tempo based on this unit. This beat naturally divides into three equal parts, and the unit of this division is the quarter-note. I'll say this again: The unit receiving the beat in 6/4 time is the dotted half-note. There is no other way to spin this statement. Look it up for yourselves.

Now, back to the time categories: There are, in fact, two and only two categories of time...
1. Compound Time, and
2. Simple Time.

We unfailingly identify Compound time by the numerator in the now-familiar time signature.

Here's the rule, and you can take this to the bank:
If the numerator is larger than three (3) and is evenly-divisible by three (3), the time signature represents Compound Time. For example, time signatures with the numerators 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and so on, all represent Compound Time.

Here's rule #2, and again, this is ironclad:
If the time signature's numerator is something other than 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, etc., the time signature represents Simple Time.

That's it. Period. Every time signature you've ever encountered, are encountering now, and will ever encounter represents either Compound or Simple Time, based on the two rules you just read.

Immediately after my first post, I sent a PM correcting the poster of the factually incorrect post. I used a PM because I did not want to embarrass this person with a public correction. By way of reply, I received this public post...

I cannot ****ing believe you sent me a ****ing PM arguing the definition of what a ****ing beat vs. a pulse is, when you can't even get your definition of simple time right. Anybody with the slightest ****ing clue, even the very very very slightest will realize that any asymetrical meter (with a non-evenly divisable value as the upper number) is compound irregular.
The only conclusion I can reach is that this individual took this private correction very personally and felt the only response was to flame me publicly. In any case, he goes on to expound on Mensural Notation. This notation was last used in 1600 or so, and has no bearing whatsoever on either...
1. the question that started this thread, or
2. the differences between Compound and Simple Time.

I have presented the way time signatures are taught in college, the Armed Forces School of Music, and in every theory textbook I have at my disposal here at home. I'm now finished with this thread. I hope the original questioner got his or her question answered.

All the best,
gpb

[Corwinoid]

^ Again, I recommend google over this foolishness. To consider that asymmetrical meters are simple shows your complete ignorance on the matter.

Once again. www.google.com

Don't take my word for it.

[sirpsycho85]

i don't know about most of the other stuff, but i've never heard of 6/4 being felt as four beats. maybe i'm misunderstanding in what context it's being considered like that.

[SilentDeftone]

Why in God's name did you bump this? Did you bother to read what was posted?

If the threadstarter needs further discussion on this I will consider opening this thread back up!

-SD :dance: