#1
Hey. I'm working on some instrumental and I was planning on having this part as a passage. I was thinking to make it a solo-guitar part, but I'm not sure yet. The thing is, the areas of it that sound more loose in rhythm - can they fit into normal time signatures and clearly separate bars? This is just a rough demo for you to listen, and it'll probably end up a bit different, but I wonder if I could: A. Tab it clearly. B. Possibly add more instruments along it which would require it having a more defined time signature(s).

Thanks in advance.

http://picosong.com/6L6U/
#2
First part is a lot more freeform, but the last part is definitely fine for time signatures if you count.
Glad to cross paths with you on this adventure called life
Quote by Jet Penguin
lots of flirting with the other key without confirming. JUST LIKE THEIR LOVE IN THE MOVIE OH DAMN.
Quote by Hail
you're acting like you have perfect pitch or something
#3
Quote by NeoMvsEu
First part is a lot more freeform, but the last part is definitely fine for time signatures if you count.


Yeah, I was basically referring to the first part. I'm having more of an issue with how to tab such a thing.
#4
Write "freely" in the beginning of the part. It doesn't have a pulse so I wouldn't try to notate it that accurately (rhythmically). It doesn't fit a time signature so I wouldn't try to fit it in a time signature. There's just no point.

And I don't know why you would do option B. Do what sounds good. Just because it's hard to tab is not a reason to add more instruments to it. You want it to sound good, not to look good on paper.

If it sounds good the way it is (there is no specific time signature), why would you want to add a specific time signature to it?


I also doubt that part is meant to be played with exact note values. It sounds like it's more up to the performer. Well, I don't know what you think. But that's how it sounds to me.
Quote by AlanHB
Just remember that there are no boring scales, just boring players.

Gear

Bach Stradivarius 37G
Charvel So Cal
Fender Dimension Bass
Hartke HyDrive 210c
Ibanez BL70
Laney VC30
Tokai TB48
Yamaha FG720S-12
Yamaha P115
#5
Tabbing it should be OK, because you don't need time sigs for tab. Just a sequence of numbers in order! Its's obviously very fast, but as long as each note is clear (and important to the composition, important for the musician to play accurately), then tabbing it should be straightforward - if time-consuming

Notating - in traditional staff notation - would be trickier. The notes do seem to fall largely into two kinds: (very) short, and long. The rapid notes are all much the same duration, so could probably be represented by the same note type (say 16ths).
But no time sig or barlines. Just - as MM says - "freely" as a marking.

It's a kind of "cadenza", basically - part of a piece in which a soloist essentially shows off, but composed not improvised (or at least largely composed).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadenza
- notice the written out Mozart cadenza there - all in 16ths, although they wouldn't be counted as actual 16ths.
(Cadenzas probably did start out as total improvisations, but then became polished and enshrined in scores.)

The player would know he/she could play it in free time, and only needs to distinguish any elements of phrasing - which (in your case) there clearly are. So you just add a long note at the end of each group of 16ths - maybe a quarter or half, but with a pause sign over it.
Last edited by jongtr at Oct 27, 2015,
#6
Thanks for the replies. Well, my main view on this was whether it can fit into clearly separate bars but rather just use dynamic tempo. I guess I'll need to count the notes and see whether they fit into sensible time signatures.

@MaggaraMarine I didn't think of adding more instruments because it's difficult to tab... I'm just not sure whether it should be solo-guitar. As it is in this rough demo it would be kind of difficult to do, but I was imagining it with some percussion going on in the back, and that requires a more definite sense of what rhythm and tempo to use.
#7
^ To me it just sounds like it's meant to be played freely. It doesn't sound like something that would work over a rhythm.

But that's really up to you. If you think it would work over a rhythm, write a rhythm. You may want to modify some of the note values to fit the rhythm behind it.


As jongtr said, it reminds me of a cadenza. And as he said, cadenzas were notated with certain note values (meaning that some of the notes were meant to be shorter and some were meant to be longer), but that didn't mean all of them were equal. It was up to the player what he wanted to do with them. I don't think it should even be notated that accurately. A cadenza is kind of a solo spot. The point of it is to be a bit free - it's basically there to let the soloist shine. Actually, cadenzas were originally improvised. People started writing them out later. Today cadenzas are usually notated, and everybody pretty much always plays the same cadenza. But of course they don't play it exactly the same way. The interpretation is up to the player.
Quote by AlanHB
Just remember that there are no boring scales, just boring players.

Gear

Bach Stradivarius 37G
Charvel So Cal
Fender Dimension Bass
Hartke HyDrive 210c
Ibanez BL70
Laney VC30
Tokai TB48
Yamaha FG720S-12
Yamaha P115
#8
Well, it's supposed to repeat one more time with a different part at the ending, so I think of perhaps having the first iteration played free-time as a solo-guitar, while in the second one it would fall into a solid rhythm and have the rest of the instruments kick-in.
#9
^ Well, do that then. Write the rhythm and see what happens. You may need to change some of the lead guitar rhythms on the second repeat.
Quote by AlanHB
Just remember that there are no boring scales, just boring players.

Gear

Bach Stradivarius 37G
Charvel So Cal
Fender Dimension Bass
Hartke HyDrive 210c
Ibanez BL70
Laney VC30
Tokai TB48
Yamaha FG720S-12
Yamaha P115