Would it be possible to write a song using the fibonnaci series to construct it? I understand Tool did something similar where the syllables in each line matched the sequence, but would it be possible to do something like this?:

0/1 (Which wouldn't be played because of the 0), 1/2, 3/5, 8/13, 13/21

I've never been able to grasp the concept of time signatures so they probably don't work, but it's just a question out of curiousity.

EDIT: And what would they be if I were to round them to the closest possible measures?
Call me Callum

Current gear - 06 MIM Strat, '02 Epiphone Les Paul, Peavey Rockingham, Tanglewood TF8, BLACKSTAR★ HT-5 Combo, EHX Holy Grail, Boss DS-1, Arion SFL-1

Newcastle (and Port Vale)
Last edited by roythereaper at May 4, 2008,
Well, with some modifications, it could. It would be awfully unnecessary though.

You can only have the numbers 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 32 as denominators. Although you a 3 can equal a dotted 2, it would be preferable if you subdivided it into 3/4, instead of, say, 1/3.

If you went 1/4, 2/4, 3/4, 5/4, it could be done. Unnecessarily long measures, but it could be done. And if you were to, after 5/4, change the denominator to 8, you could get some wicked time signatures with some nice balances.

Brilliant idea, I'm keeping an eye on this.

I would respond to your edit, but I'm afraid I'm not quite sure what you're saying.
Last edited by CanCan at May 4, 2008,
Time has become a popular point today. Short version: time signatures indicate the basic metrical pattern underlying the rhythm of the music (definition from a theory book i have). Most commonly seen is two numbers. The top number indicates the number of beats in a measure; the bottom number indicates the type of note with a time value of one beat. One of the more common time sig. is 4/4, meaning one measure of music will have 4 beats and the quarter note is worth one beat. Those 4 beats (in 4/4 time) will be one whole note, or 2 half notes, or 4 qtr. notes, or 8 eighth notes, etc. Also, each beat of the measure will be stressed differently. In 4/4 the stress of the beats is Swsw where S=strong w=weak and s=secondary stress. Hope this helps.
I used the wrong term in my edit, you've effectively done what I had intended. Thanks for the help, in about 3 sentences you gave a more comprehensive and understandable answer than the Wikipedia page!

It would be a while until it was put into practice and I'm worried it'll end up too long (e.g. long enough to scare Mike Oldfield) but I shall see. Thank you once again.

EDIT: Thanks to Zoomy too, I knew most of that, it was mainly the denominators I was unsure of.
Call me Callum

Current gear - 06 MIM Strat, '02 Epiphone Les Paul, Peavey Rockingham, Tanglewood TF8, BLACKSTAR★ HT-5 Combo, EHX Holy Grail, Boss DS-1, Arion SFL-1

Newcastle (and Port Vale)
Any time, Rory.
Quote by zoomy74
The top number indicates the number of beats in a measure; the bottom number indicates the type of note with a time value of one beat.
This is true for simple time, but not compound time. I'll post a lesson on compound time in a sec.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_signatures
Last edited by bangoodcharlote at May 4, 2008,
Ah, so compound time is divisible by 3? That's easy enough.

I have to admit, I'm shocked with how helpful people are in here despite the fact I'm asking a question that is probably asked more often than you should care to answer... Or maybe the Pitmonkeys have lowered my expectations.
Call me Callum

Current gear - 06 MIM Strat, '02 Epiphone Les Paul, Peavey Rockingham, Tanglewood TF8, BLACKSTAR★ HT-5 Combo, EHX Holy Grail, Boss DS-1, Arion SFL-1

Newcastle (and Port Vale)
Quote by roythereaper
Ah, so compound time is divisible by 3? That's easy enough.
Np, because 3/4 is not compound time.

Compound time takes a "simple" meter like 4/4 or 3/4, and assigns three triplets to a beat rather than 2 8th notes. 4/4 is "ONE and TWO and THREE and FOUR and" while 12/8 is "ONE and uh TWO and uh THREE and uh FOUR and uh." 3/4 is ONE and TWO and THREE and while 9/8 is "ONE and uh TWO and uh THREE and uh."

Zoomy will dispute this, but he's wrong.
I'd like to throw in, as a matter of style, using something as an overarching pattern like this, which grows rapidly, is usually a bad idea, because it becomes unmanageable. It's easier, and tends to make more sense, if you apply things like the fib series to phrase lengths (in measures), or decide on some cut off point to start over.
Quote by les_kris
Corwinoid is God
I'm not even God-like... I've officially usurped the Almighty's throne.

Member #3 of the Corwinoid Fan Club
To Corwinoid, I'll probably go back after a certain amount of measures and change the numerator, like CanCan suggested.

To Bangoodcharlote, thanks for the explanation.
Call me Callum

Current gear - 06 MIM Strat, '02 Epiphone Les Paul, Peavey Rockingham, Tanglewood TF8, BLACKSTAR★ HT-5 Combo, EHX Holy Grail, Boss DS-1, Arion SFL-1

Newcastle (and Port Vale)
I just read the wikipedia definition and have a music fundamental book right in front of me. To quote from the wikipedia link you posted:In compound time signatures, each main beat is divided into three equal parts (as distinct from the two equal parts in simple time). Compound time signatures are distinguished by an upper number which is commonly 6, 9 or 12. The most common lower number in a compound time signature is 8, meaning the time is beaten in eighth notes (quavers
My music book says that as well as saying that if you group a pattern of six beats into 2 groups of 3 it is classified compound duple rhythm; group three groups of three is classified compound triple rhythm; group 4 groups of 3 is classified compound quadruple rhythm for 6/8 or 6/4; 9/8 or 9/4; 12/8 or 12/4 respectively. My point is the lower number still refers to the type of note with a value of one beat. Another way to illustrate my point: if you are looking at a piece of music with a doted qtr and 3 eighth notes, is it 3/4 or 6/8 time? According to my theory book it is how the eighth notes are beamed together. The time signature gives you an indication of the rhythm structure of the piece, as well as let you know how to quantify how long you play each note. I've read a lot on the subject and played in jazz bands having to read even sight read(reading the piece for the first time while you are playing it) a lot. Time signature tells you how to play the piece rhythmically.
Do you suggest that I write the tempo of my next 12/8 piece as "eighth note=(number)?" And if not, what is it? Could it possible be a dotted quarter note?????

Where the hell is Gpb when you need him?

Zoomy: I'm going to stop arguing my (correct) point and just tell people that you know nothing about compound time when you post. Immature? Perhaps. Time saving? Absolutely.

As for right now, I'm going to protest your stupidity by stopping in the middle of a
I never expected to see this much elitism outside of GG&A
Call me Callum

Current gear - 06 MIM Strat, '02 Epiphone Les Paul, Peavey Rockingham, Tanglewood TF8, BLACKSTAR★ HT-5 Combo, EHX Holy Grail, Boss DS-1, Arion SFL-1

Newcastle (and Port Vale)
BGC: I think it was me and gpb who use to argue over the difference between the pulse and the beat. The pulse in a compound time would be the beat grouping, the beat is actually the note that gets the duration. So... in 9/8, the beat is the 8th note, the pulse is the dotted quarter.

And yes. I have quite a bit of music in 6/8 and 9/8 that has 8th = X
Quote by les_kris
Corwinoid is God
I'm not even God-like... I've officially usurped the Almighty's throne.

Member #3 of the Corwinoid Fan Club
Bangoodcharlote: I'm really not trying to be a pain, and I agree with you that compound time is groupings of 3, but they are not triplets. Also, your counting of 4/4 time is incorrect it is 1 2 3 4 not 1 and 2 and 3 and 4. When enunciating or tapping with your foot or clapping you are voicing either the beats in a measure or the written notes in the measure. If I say 1&2&3&4 and call it 4/4 I am voicing a string of 7 eighth notes. I think the confusion is that compound is not triplets over one beat. Compound time is 6,9,or 12 beats in a measure grouped by threes; the difference is each group of three takes place in a beat and a half (thinking in simple time), NOT one beat as a triplet does.
Last edited by zoomy74 at May 4, 2008,
Quote by bangoodcharlote
Why?

And I'm siding with G is your argumen. Sorry.
Usually because it's too slow to count the pulse.... 8=40 is what, a pulse every what, three seconds or something (I'm kind of guessing there, I don't feel like working it out).

It's worth noting that even at the horrifically slow tempos, you still hear two distinct pulses in each measure.

GPB has a tendency to argue everything as it's stated in the HDM. I've found numerous errors and inaccuracies in HDM though, and its explanation of meter is really really weak. It's particularly notorious for defining irregular meters in a manner that's completely out of touch with the reality of music, while deceptively seeming accurate if you only look at what's on paper. HDM is useful and all, but it's flat out wrong about some things, and meter happens to be one of them.

This is probably because people have a really hard time understanding the difference between a pulse and a beat, and where they come from, and why we even have compound meter in the first place... and that in most cases you don't need to make the distinction any more. When you finally do need the distinction, it's hard to get because it challenges how you've been learning things.

In most natural tempos -- which covers a huge range of music -- "beat" and "pulse" are fairly interchangeable. That's why you count quick 9/8 or 12/8 music in three or four, and kind of feel a triplet pulse. As soon as you get into irregular meters, and extreme tempos (in either direction, slow is more exemplary even), the difference between the beat and the pulse becomes a lot more apparent. This is especially true when you start to work with heavy metric modulation, which challenges most of your preconceived notions about rhythm and meter

It's actually kind of hard to give definitions for both terms that works technically and functionally. The latter is probably better though, in which case you would want to say the beat is the integral countable unit, and the pulse is the points of metric accent. (FWIW, this is wildly inaccurate as a technical defn., but maintains the relationship).
Quote by les_kris
Corwinoid is God
I'm not even God-like... I've officially usurped the Almighty's throne.

Member #3 of the Corwinoid Fan Club
^^ I'm not even about to attempt to add anything to this thread as I think that it's just an argument over semantics.. but I am curious about what the "HDM" is that you referenced. I tried googling but to no avail.
Nor less I deem that there are Powers
Which of themselves our minds impress;
That we can feed this mind of ours
In a wise passiveness.
--Wordsworth

last.fm
So taking a stab at this, you would say in a 9/8 time signature every third beat is the pulse? It seems a bit abstract to me.
Call me Callum

Current gear - 06 MIM Strat, '02 Epiphone Les Paul, Peavey Rockingham, Tanglewood TF8, BLACKSTAR★ HT-5 Combo, EHX Holy Grail, Boss DS-1, Arion SFL-1

Newcastle (and Port Vale)
HDM = Harvard Dictionary of Music... pretty much the first point of reference if you want to know something about music (followed immediately by Groves, and the references in Groves).

roy: Yeah, pretty much. It's the method of viewing beats/pulses that makes the most sense, especially as music starts to get more complicated. ie. 5/8 has 5 beats taking an 8th note duration, but usually a measure in five pulses twice with either an irregular or uneven pulse (3+2, for example). You feel that pulse more than you feel the 5/8.

It's probably helps to realize, also, that the terms are a few hundred years old, long before we had metronomes, and even long before we had meter and rhythm as we know it today.
Quote by les_kris
Corwinoid is God
I'm not even God-like... I've officially usurped the Almighty's throne.