arpeggios- in 3 or 4?

[Tash]

forever i have been grouping my arpeggios in 4 groups of 3 (so the accent is always on the starting note), but ages ago my teacher told me they were meant to be in 3 groups of 4. and i was like no way that's retarded. and then the other week it suddenly dawned on me how it works, and seems kind of logical, except at first i was like you can't have only 3 groups, things happen in 4-bar phrases!! discuss what is meant to be going on!

[ted]

The perceived rhythmic grouping of any keyboard figure need not coincide with either fingering group or pattern group. In fact, it seems to me that the musical effect is usually much more interesting if it does not. There is also the intriguing but common case of hearing something in a different rhythm to that in which it was conceived; rather like one of those isometric pictures which can be seen in two ways. A frequent instance is mentally mixing 3/4 with 6/8.

Perceived and intended rhythm have fascinated me since I was a kid, when I invariably felt all my time signatures "wrongly". I do not think that things "happen" in any particular formation, Tash; there are no rules about it. It is we who CHOOSE how we shall perceive anything we hear. The greater the variety of our rhythmic perception, the more meaning our listening and playing will contain, or so it seems to me. Even a simple arpeggio has an infinite continuity of perceived rhythm; if we dare to choose freedom over restriction.

 

[Tash]

riight...you know i realised the reason why 3 groups of 4 wasn't sounding weird any more was because i was in fact doing it in 2 groups of 6!! ah well i suppose if you just play the arpeggios with no accents at all it really, as you said ted, doesn't matter...

[stevehopwood]

The easiest way to play arpeggios is to think in triplets but not accent the first of each group. That way you get the best of both worlds. Anybody listening to them hears a seamless stream of notes; you avoid tying your brain in knots.

Steve