metronome markings

[michael_sayers]

Hi Everyone,

I recall a source which says that for a m.m marking such as m.m. = 47 - 52, the tempo will range from 47 to 52 rather than being a particular tempo in that range.

To accommodate this the score could read "m.m. = 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 or 52". This seems like an unnecessarily long solution, especially for one that is m.m. = 99 - 130.

Maybe someone here has thoughts on how to have a m.m. marking encompass the guideline in that source and suggest a range of tempos rather than a tempo range.


Mvh,
Michael

[j_menz]

My suggestion - use a tempo/mood indication (such as Allegro, Andante etc) instead of a mm marking. They're much more useful anyway.

[michael_sayers]

My suggestion - use a tempo/mood indication (such as Allegro, Andante etc) instead of a mm marking. They're much more useful anyway.

Hi j_menz,

Sometimes more precision is desired.  A mood indicator can go between the staves [such as "con furia", "solenne", et c.].


Mvh,
Michael

[j_menz]

Sometimes more precision is desired. 

Tempo is a function of heartbeat (so it's perception will depend on what's preceded). Some pianos sound faster than others. Some rooms sound faster than others.

Don't confuse precision with accuracy.

1 + 1 = 2.0000003143637 is still wrong.

[michael_sayers]

Tempo is a function of heartbeat (so it's perception will depend on what's preceded). Some pianos sound faster than others. Some rooms sound faster than others.

Don't confuse precision with accuracy.

1 + 1 = 2.0000003143637 is still wrong.

Hi j_menz,

I agree.  So one might suggest a range of (for instance) 47 - 58.  The source I read implied that "m.m. = 47 - 58" would indicate for the tempo to fluctuate within that range.  Yet to have "m.m. = 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57 or 58", in order to avoid suggesting to some readers that the tempo will fluctuate with a range from 47 to 58, seems like a peculiarly long m.m. indication.


Mvh,
Michael