It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
Twisted Imaginings - A Horror And Gore Themed Blog http://bit.ly/2DF1NYi
2/4 sounds more 'urgent' because beat 1 should have the strongest accent and so be be heard more often..
also it will have a shorter phrase length
the difference is quite subtle, but it's there...
In favour of 6/8:
- The tick-tock sound, like a slow pendulum. Listen to the bass drum kicking the pendulum one way and the rim shot returning the kick. Tick-tock. Tick-tock. One-TWO. One-TWO.
- Slower tempi tend to support shorter bars because a very slow 4/4 is unwieldy and difficult to carry; this song seems about a beat per second and doesn't have quite the same convincingly long melodic lines as, say, the largo in Vivaldi's winter, which is a slow 4/4 but has a very strong melody spanning the entire bar.
In favour of 12/8:
- the length and flow of the vocal lines and rhymes particularly in the chorus. You could argue that 6/8 would be chopping the melodies in half, and in the verse you could avoid the slightly clunky alternating bar shapes (the rest-sing, and sing-rest you'd get from 6/8).
- you could argue that the first two beats are more prominant than the second two, making the rim shots land on 2 and 4, and the kick's volume different on the 1 and the 3, as per Clarky's first message.
Depsite this I would still plump for 6/8, though there's nothing wrong with 12/8 - it's perfectly feasible especially during the solo where the momentum does allow the long bars to carry.
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
Great song and great album too.
Take something like U2's "Where the streets have no name " intro and outro. I hear that in 6/8 and that's where I push it but to some people it's 3/4 and their push is different ... had a big ol argument at rehearsal once about that
EDIT - sorry, just realised I sounded really pompous the way I worded that post. I'm not trying to prove a point etc. Just having a good chat about music :-)
4/4: 1 = strong, 2 = weak, 3 = strong [but less strong than 1], 4 = weak
2/4: 1 = strong, 2 = weak
it's not just math
Yep, 3/4 is completely different from 6/8 for example, because one's in 3 time with an oompapa sound, the other's in 2 time with a tick-tock sound and triplets.
good banter.
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
3/4 is simple time: 1 and 2 and 3 and
6/8 is compound time: 1 and a 2 and a
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
there are of course a couple of schools of thought that can be a little at odds in places..
mostly between the folks that learnt jazz / contemporary and those that learnt classical music..
those debates can be a real ball ache.. but it's mostly personalities in combat rather than the knowledge itself
the fundamentals though are well established..
the big prob with the web is that everyone that logs in becomes a self appointed teacher..
no matter if they know what they're talking about or not
that's fine if the original question simply needs an opinion..
not so fine if there's an answer that is an absolute..
with respect to the piece being debated here though, having listened to it a few times now, I'd be inclined not to score it in a single time sig throughout.. because in this case, one size won't fit all that well..
there are very specific rhythmic changes going on, and that is most likely at the heart of the indecision within this debate..
time sigs absolutely have a 'feel' of their own due to accents, phrase length, when chords change and don't [can be emphasised more obviously when you hear the piece hit an important chord - like the one that starts / ends the progression, etc]…
this is why 2/4 and 4/4, or 6/8 and 12/8 exist.. because on the surface one looks like it's simply twice the size of the other, but there's a little more to it than that… in contemporary music these subtleties can almost, but not quite, vanish, to the point where often the artist simply writes a song that sounds cool to them and they just count it the way that it makes sense to them - which could in truth be right or wrong..
in orchestral music the difference is more pronounced because of the dynamics employed during the performance [orchestral musicians are generally schooled to be more sensitive to this stuff] and the locations of specific 'moments of importance' like cadences..
I do agree with you that getting a point across in writing, especially with respect to something you're hearing, can be a total nightmare.. lol..
Just to clarify, the post of mine I've quoted is misleading - I don't mean to say that 6/8 and 3/4 are the same thing.
I was talking about the U2 song Danny mentioned, and how one person might hear the intro bit as 6/8 when someone else might hear it in 3/4. Nothing musical has changed, only the listeners' perceptions of where the pulse is.
(I haven't listened to the end, so forgive me if there's a prog middle section in 7/8, though I highly doubt it)
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
Considering the original piece, I hear it go from 12/8 to 6/8 at 0:42 and back to 12/8 at 1:15, for example.
R.
Eqd Speaker Cranker clone
Monte Allums TR-2 Plus mod kit
Trading feedback: http://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/60602/
Not that any of this matters.
I realize I might be wrong, but that's how I see it