Music theory question - Dots and Ties.

[adodd81802]

Hi,

A couple questions on music theory specifically dots and ties. I see them, I play them, but I am learning about the more obscure ones to better my understanding in theory, which is much more lacking than my practical. In all this time i've played piano (on and off 13 years), Only last year I learnt what Compound and Simple times were.... Woops!

So scenario 1, I understand that ties are used across bars where note values are longer than a bars' full value and dots are generally used in bars.

It is my understanding however, that ties are also used in bars in place of dots to better distinguish beats. (stop me here if i've already got this wrong!)

For example in a 3/4 timing if the first note was a dotted crotchet (dotted quarter note!) would you not have it written as a crotchet, tied to a quaver? to point out it's actually tied into the next beat?

Now as this is simple time, there are no dots involved in making a full beat so everything seems to fit quite nicely.

With compound time, full beats are dotted notes, and so is it correct to write a dotted note into a tie if it crosses a beat?

For example in a 6/8 timing if the first note was a double-dotted quaver, you should instead change this to a dotted quaver tied to a semi quaver?

I'm not familiar with any music where I have seen this, so my question is not because I think i'm wrong, but because it's not easy to find out if i'm definitely right.

Is there any situations where you would double tie a note in the same bar? a note who's value cut into 3 of a 4 beat bar unevenly? e.g in 12/8 a double dotted minim, would this be dotted crotchet tied to a dotted crotchet, tied to a quaver? or just a dotted minim tied to a quaver? I'm presuming it's only the beat it breaks where the tie is indicated.

Separate to this.

I understand 4/4 has a strong 1st beat and an emphasized 3rd beat, which affects beaming.
Is the same for any 12/over compound times? 12/16 still has a strong 1 and emphasized 3rd? Does this mean you could group 6 semiquavers together, but not 12, like in 6/8 you could group all 6 quavers together covering both beats 1 and 2 because beat 2 is weak... Is it still better practice to just beam-group the notes beat by beat?

I appreciate in the real world, if you're not intending on composing, this isn't necessarily important information, but I'd like to understand it better. I will provide images if it better helps what i'm describing.

[keypeg]

This is really hard to set out in a forum post, or in writing in general.  I think I know what you are talking about.  I was in something like my fourth year of lessons on another instrument as an adult, when I asked to study theory.  I went through the RCM rudiments book (Barbara Wharram), covering all three years/levels in a few months.  This was one of the things we covered.  The teacher I had tried to expand past the dry theory in front of me, to get past learning "rules".  His point was that notation is meant to reflect the music we hear.

Therefore in one context you might see a dotted quarter note.  In another context you might see a quarter note tied to an eighth note being the same note.  Both are played for the same length (the value of three eighth notes).  The reason for the choices is what the underlying  pulse is doing.  At the time I was studying compound time, and had come to an exercise where we were to choose beaming, rest values, correct mistakes such as those two choices.  I was spouting memorized rules to justify my choices, and that teacher stopped me cold, and started tapping out rhythms, playing selections, and having me hear the music part.

I am almost tempted to think that you are studying the same RCM material that I studied, just by the way you are wording things - or something similar. (?)

Btw, I didn't know about compound time either.  A year before I had learned the Saint Saens Swan, which I think is in 6/8 time, and had no idea there were two beats per bar.  What I did figure out was that "the swan is kicking its legs twice every measure to propel itself forward" .  That got me there in a roundabout way.

[iansinclair]

One is rather tempted to reply... whatever works.  The idea of the notation is to convey how the music flows, in terms of how long notes are to be held and where emphases are to be placed.  To this must be added just how easy is the score to read?  Sometimes a note will be shown as dotted -- for instance, a dotted half note getting three beats, followed perhaps by a quarter rest.  Sometimes the same note could be written as a plain half note tied to a quarter note, followed by the rest.  One might choose the latter if there were other notes in the measure: for instance, suppose one had a measure in 4/4 time which started with a C major chord, first position -- C E G -- but on the third beat you wanted to change to a G major chord, inverted -- B D G.  You might would write the C and E as half notes, followed by the B and D as quarter notes.  But what do you do with the G?  For clarity, it would be best to write it as a half note tied to a quarter note assuming that you didn't want the G to be struck again.

[adodd81802]

Thanks for your answers so far.

@Keypeg, I am using https://www.amazon.co.uk/Tonal-Harmony-Stefan-Kostka/dp/0073401358

Stefan Kostkas Tonal Harmony. Mostly because I was able to get a free copy along side a "workbook" I would assume though that the content is probably all the same. I also think self learning is probably the hardest way to find out the answers to these sort of questions.

I may need to read more into the book to better understand, as you tend to find a lot of questions are answered once you have covered the whole book.

[louispodesta]

This is really hard to set out in a forum post, or in writing in general.  I think I know what you are talking about.  I was in something like my fourth year of lessons on another instrument as an adult, when I asked to study theory.  I went through the RCM rudiments book (Barbara Wharram), covering all three years/levels in a few months.  This was one of the things we covered.  The teacher I had tried to expand past the dry theory in front of me, to get past learning "rules".  His point was that notation is meant to reflect the music we hear.

Therefore in one context you might see a dotted quarter note.  In another context you might see a quarter note tied to an eighth note being the same note.  Both are played for the same length (the value of three eighth notes).  The reason for the choices is what the underlying  pulse is doing.  At the time I was studying compound time, and had come to an exercise where we were to choose beaming, rest values, correct mistakes such as those two choices.  I was spouting memorized rules to justify my choices, and that teacher stopped me cold, and started tapping out rhythms, playing selections, and having me hear the music part.

I am almost tempted to think that you are studying the same RCM material that I studied, just by the way you are wording things - or something similar. (?)

Btw, I didn't know about compound time either.  A year before I had learned the Saint Saens Swan, which I think is in 6/8 time, and had no idea there were two beats per bar.  What I did figure out was that "the swan is kicking its legs twice every measure to propel itself forward" .  That got me there in a roundabout way.

Thank you Keypeg for your insightful post.  It has the guts to challenge the Post World War II dictum of the Urtext methodology of "Meticulous Attention to the Score."

I am a pianist, per my video, who has spent 16 years studying the original performance practice of Claude Debussy.  That means: when so-called experts (Roy Howat) state that Debussy was a stickler as to how his piano music was to be played, they manifest a falsehood.

While Debussy would often go nuts when hearing his music performed in public, it had nothing to do with rolled chords, modified tempos, or in regards the OP's questions regarding "Dots and Ties."  What his overt criticsm addressed was playing his music in a romantic fashion, as is commonplace to today.

So, I advise the OP to 1)  get a copy of Ken Caswell's piano roll recording of Debussy.

https://www.amazon.com/Claude-Debussy-Composer-Pianist-Collection/dp/B00005IC03/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1480898283&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=Debuusy+Composer+as+Pianist

2)  Then, get a copy of the scores associated with this great music.  Then, you will understand Keypeg's point of "in context," as it applies to a particular composer's music.

Thank you once again, Keypeg.

[fhouse]

I think your 3/4 time answer is correct where you break the dotted quarter note into a quarter note tied to an eighth note (which I assume gets beamed to the other eighth note).

As for compound time, you lost me with your note value terms as I'm unfamiliar with them (I know they are in use but I've never dealt with those terms).  However, I think this picture (from my music theory textbook, which I'm preparing for its final exam) might help you.

Here, it is 6/8 time, which is a compound duple meter, and you can see the beats clearly in the picture.  As for your 12/8 time question, is it compound quadruple (kind of like 4/4 time), so you'd form 4 beats per measure.  HOWEVER, now (after taking the pic already), I realized that my example isn't the best, it doesn't show the case where you'd not want to break the note with ties.  For example, in your first 3/4 time question, if you had a dotted half note in a measure, you'd want to keep it that way.

Hope  this helps.

[adodd81802]

Hi Thanks for your response.

Yes admitedly I waffle on a little, and had I provided the picture example to which I was referring too, it probably would have made a lot more sense.

Luckily enough, I managed to grab an answer book, and checked, and I was correct.. So whether by logic or chance I got the answers right

I think the theory was easier than I realised but I just started over thinking it. Music theory seems to be designed to trick you wherever possible.

Oh no this isn't the major signature this is the relative minor signature - HAHAHA jokes on you!