![]() So far we’ve seen that there is a general preference for minim bridges over imaginary barlines, less so perhaps as the minim’s supporting posts on beats 1 and 4 become more complex. Furthermore, I suspect that there will be a significant proportion of readers who will always prefer (or at least tolerate) a minim bridge regardless of the content in the rest of the bar. The limited data supports this, but it’s only a tentative suggestion. While the majority may prefer a minim bridge to an imaginary barline (IB), as the material at beats 1 and 4 become more complex, perhaps more people prefer the IB over the bridge presentation (see Figure 3)įigure 3 Hard and weak minim bridges with imaginary barline equivalents, and a suggested preference curve. We could in fact imagine minim bridges of different strengths. 1b and 1c on the other hand have weaker posts, the quavers and semiquavers respectively, slightly masking the clarity of beats 1 and 4. 1a has a minim bridge well supported by a crotchet post on either end, clearly presenting beats 1 and 4. Notice that the preference for the minim bridge reduces as we subdivide the material on beats 1 and 4). Note that positing the minim bridge allows us to talk of – among other things – crotchet bridges on beats 1& to 2& and their implications in sight reading. ![]() It seems that readers tolerate this well. At this point I’m going to suggest some terminology, let’s call the formation with a central minim (covering beats 2 and 3) as a minim bridge. You’ll notice that in all 3 cases, a central minim is preferred over an imaginary barline. (NB NP= no preference and please note also that due to rounding errors, the percentages in this – and other examples – may not add up to 100% exactly, please get over it.) Notice how preference is eroded by the weaker ‘bridge posts’. But this begs the question, at what point does the imaginary barline ‘kick in’?įigure 2 presents the results of the first 3 exercisesįigure 2 Preferences for Examples 1-3, testing the limits of the imaginary barline. Of course, semibreves (and dotted minims) violate this regularly, so we might consider them honorary exceptions to this rule. The Extent of Imaginary BarlinesĮxamples 1-3 test the concept of the imaginary barline – the idea that we should notate as if 4/4 was actually 2 consecutive 2/4 bars, separated by an invisible barline. We’ll break these down in sections so we can discuss the various implications. You may want to make a note of your preferences at this point, before we look at the results from our cohort of readers. Ok so Figure 1, shows a series of numbered extracts, from which the subject indicates a preference (or no preference). I’m sure if I looked for 7 seconds longer I’d find Ideathief & Twatamaholey’s comprehensive and beautifully argued 1973 thesis on the topic. I spent a few seconds googling relevant terms, but basically wanted to follow through these ideas prima vista. A major restriction, but one must start somewhere. We are limiting ourselves to 4/4, single notes and no rests.All from Facebook, and most of whom are my friends, so make of that what you will. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |