Why is 6/8 more awesome than 4/4?

PolarityMan

thecolourbox said:

I think his point on the waltz thing is that if 6/8 is performed correctly it should not be the same as a waltz because the accents should not be equal on quavers 1 and 4, rather that 1 is stronger than 4. I know what you mean though a lot of bands tend to miss this out so it sounds like a waltz more than it would do if done correctly

PolarityMan said:

thecolourbox said:

, if you count 1 2 3 4 5 6 or 1 e a 2 e a with your feet it sounds the same. The bigger accent is on the 1st of the taps,  the lesser accent on the 4th of the taps. 

Counting "1 e a 2 e a" tends to produce a lesser accent on 2 usually.  Counting 1 2 3 4 5 6 tends to produce only an accent on the 1. It might not be supposed to but it often does.

Then it's wrongly accented if the accent is only on quaver 1! 6/8 is compound (ie dotted note beats) duple (being two of said beats to bar)

Sometimes, depends what the music is. I think it still makes sense to notate in 6/8 even if there isn't necessarily a duple feel provided the phrase length is 6 eight notes.

You cant say what the correct accent pattern is just from the time sig, proof via reductio ad adsurdum is in a bar in which an instrument rests, there is no accent but the context of the rest of the piece may determine that bar to be in 6/8. 

thecolourbox

Ah see I'm coming from the classical theory perspective, 6/8 from that POV is 2 dotted crotchets I think more than 6 quavers, 6 quavers in pairs would then have different accents and therefore be 3/4!

In classical theory you can say what the adverts will be from the time sig as that's the point of having them to a certain extent.

thecolourbox

But in any case, to go back to your original post, 6/8 is more interesting than 4/4 in my opinion as well, I feel the groups of three tends to give much more of a rolling feel to the rhythm phrases, plus it gives the possibility of duplet quavers over the three normal beat quavers (think it's called hemiola?) which always sounds better in context than switch from two quavers to a triplet of quavers in standard 4 time

PolarityMan

It's not just more interesting to me it feels more spacious somehow.

Teetonetal

thecolourbox said:

Teetonetal said:

thecolourbox said:

6/8 is just 2/4 with triplet quavers, if your beat accents are correct

No, no no..

 6/8 is not 2/4 triplets Technically the counting would be different. 1 2 3 4 5 6  vs  1 e a 2 e a. and as above playing triplets in 6/8 is nothing like playing triplets in 2/4

the whole point with time sigs is that whilst things might sound the same they would be written differently, so tempo is also set differently...

With respect, I disagree. I've generally counted 2/4 or 6/8 as 2 beats because on really long pieces of music it's a pain in the ass to tap quickly 6 times a bar when you only really need to tap twice slowly, and usually with my feet which cannot speak! So what you call the taps is largely irrelevant in my experience. But even if you do count the quavers (in 6/8) or the triplet-quavers (in 2/4), if you count 1 2 3 4 5 6 or 1 e a 2 e a with your feet it sounds the same. The bigger accent is on the 1st of the taps,  the lesser accent on the 4th of the taps. 

Teetonetal said:

and the nail in the coffin:

6/8 can have 3 crotchets (technically the middle crotchet should be 2 quavers tied...), 2/4 cannot possibly have 3 crotchets..

Yes it can, triplet crotchets and contrarywise you can have duplet-quavers to total the same as 3/8 (or half a 6/8)

and triplet crotchets are NOT the same as 3 crotchets which is the point. to make it work you have to write it differently and more complexly... (although you shouldn't write 3 crotchets either as the middle one straddles beat 3 and 4 so should be 2 tied quavers)

Time sigs are primarily a way to write music in is most simplest form to read and quickest form to write, lets face it you could write a piece of music in 4/4 to sound like 3/4 if you really wanted using accents etc, but why would you? It would be hard to read and a PITA to write.

same applies to 6/8 it has an inbuilt feel that means it's quicker to write (by hand) than doing 2/4 or 4/4 triplets.... remember all this stuff stems from the days of each score sheet being written...

Interesting video on conducting this stuff...  which covers counting and time sigs from the conductors perspective... when slow conducting in 6 when fast conducting 2 4 but counting 6..

PolarityMan

Using the grid in a DAW really crystalizes this stuff for me. You can set the grid lines to be triplet notes or straight and it becomes very obvious indeed the difference between a part in triplet time and a part in a time sig which just happens to be in a time sig that has a multiple of 3 in it.

PolarityMan

Also the context of the surrounding parts is important too, you could notate a bar of 6/8 in triplet time and change the tempo instead. But doing that would be really retarded to program.

thecolourbox

I know what you guys are getting at, and I am talking from a very annoyingly pedantic point of view! But I cant see how a triplet of crotchets in 2/4 (so three crotchets in the time of two) doesn't sound the same as three crotchets across the two main beats of 6/8. They are both a third of a bar each, the only difference is in how individuals perform it but that's a different thing!

And I think that's what the op is referring to, more than my pedantic asides!

People do perform it differently but that's ascribed by their interpretation of the feel, rather than a requisite if the time sig, and that's what makes compound time more interesting

PolarityMan

thecolourbox said:

I know what you guys are getting at, and I am talking from a very annoyingly pedantic point of view! But I cant see how a triplet of crotchets in 2/4 (so three crotchets in the time of two) doesn't sound the same as three crotchets across the two main beats of 6/8. They are both a third of a bar each, the only difference is in how individuals perform it but that's a different thing!

And I think that's what the op is referring to, more than my pedantic asides!

People do perform it differently but that's ascribed by their interpretation of the feel, rather than a requisite if the time sig, and that's what makes compound time more interesting

I think people are confusing terms there is a difference between a group of three quarter notes and quarter note triplets.

PolarityMan

And one of my earlier points is that the presence of eight note triplets in a 6/8 bar is a good indicator that it isn't 2/4. Similarly if a repeated phrase length is a multiple of 6 eight notes.

guitarfishbay

6/8 can sound heavier, blackcurrantier, and more pirateshipyarrr.

thecolourbox

PolarityMan;712750" said:

And one of my earlier points is that the presence of eight note triplets in a 6/8 bar is a good indicator that it isn't 2/4. Similarly if a repeated phrase length is a multiple of 6 eight notes.

Isn't that just a sextuplet? Hang on what's an eigth note, is that a quaver or semiquaver in normal? Never had to learn those names haha

Phil_aka_Pip

1/4 = crotchet
1/8 = quaver
1/16 = semiquaver

The American convention does have its uses, even though I was brought up on and am more comfortable with the English nomenclature. Apparently they use the numbers in Europe as well (Well, I was told that)

viz

guitarfishbay said:

6/8 can sound heavier, blackcurrantier, and more pirateshipyarrr.

Definitely.

PolarityMan

The american style makes way more sense to me. 

PolarityMan

If your "normal triplet" is a quarter note triplet then an eight note triplet could be viewed as a sextuplet. Both of these are still different from a group of 3 quarter notes or a group of 3 eight notes though.