Piano Forum
Piano Board => Student's Corner => Music Theory => Topic started by: kawaigs40 on March 08, 2007, 12:28:45 PM
-
In my edition (Schirmer/Buonamici) of Schubert, Four Impromptus, Op.90 No.3, the time signature shows two cut time symbols side by side. The open ends of the cut time symbols are facing each other. I’ve never seen this before. Is there a name for this time signature? Looking at the score, it seems to be the same as 4/2. Is there a difference between 4/2 and the symbol I've described? I've checked my Harvard Dictionary, Oxford Companion, and searched online, all with no luck. Anybody know?
-
Schirmer ewwww...
...o lol actually that's my only copy too >< don't know how many times i've looked at this piece, yet i never paid any attention to that time signature marking!
The implication on the music in regards to rhythm is as you described. Maybe it's a quirky [or more elegant] way of writing C + C [?]
-
cut time = 2/2, so 2 cut times = 4/2. You are correct.
I have a feeling that the actual time signature 4/2 was pretty much in disuse or avoided before the Romantic era. Bach also wrote a fugue from the WTC in 4/2, but chose instead to designate it with just a C. Rather confusing at first, actually.
Phil
-
I believe I've also seen 4/2 notated like an "O" with the vertical line. Sort of like the C but with the gap closed.
-
I e-mailed Schirmer Publishing yesterday and posed the same question. I wonder if I'll get a response.
-
I received an e-mail response from G. Schirmer, Inc.:
Mr. _________,
After looking at the exact edition that you have my colleagues and I were not around in 1897, but we have our own hypothesis: that this is to somehow signify “cut time of cut time.”
In essence you are correct that it is composed in measures of 4/2 and the tempo marking indicates that the half note is the value getting the beat, but the way it is engraved shows that the whole notes may actually be the note that is receiving the beat.
In which case the tempo marking should have probably said “whole note = 168,” but anyway, you are correct it is in 4/2 and with the half = 84.
There are many engraving aspects from 1897 and before that we do not use anymore, and now you can see for obvious reasons why we do not.
Best of luck,
- Peter.
Peter Stanley Martin
Production Associate
Assistant Editor
G. Schirmer, Inc. / Associated Music Publishers
257 Park Avenue South, New York, NY 10010
-
I received an e-mail response from G. Schirmer, Inc.:
Mr. _________,
After looking at the exact edition that you have my colleagues and I were not around in 1897, but we have our own hypothesis: that this is to somehow signify “cut time of cut time.”
In essence you are correct that it is composed in measures of 4/2 and the tempo marking indicates that the half note is the value getting the beat, but the way it is engraved shows that the whole notes may actually be the note that is receiving the beat.
In which case the tempo marking should have probably said “whole note = 168,” but anyway, you are correct it is in 4/2 and with the half = 84.
There are many engraving aspects from 1897 and before that we do not use anymore, and now you can see for obvious reasons why we do not.
Best of luck,
- Peter.
Peter Stanley Martin
Production Associate
Assistant Editor
G. Schirmer, Inc. / Associated Music Publishers
257 Park Avenue South, New York, NY 10010
All you need to know about Schirmer is addressed in the fact that they cannot even give you a proper tempo ratio in that e-mail. ;D
Phil
-
All you need to know about Schirmer is addressed in the fact that they cannot even give you a proper tempo ratio in that e-mail. ;D
Phil
Sad, but unfortunately true.