3/4 vs. 6/8 (time signatures)

[johndough247]

@tuBass

There are 3 types of time signatures: Simple, Compound (or Complex I believe might be U.S. terminology) and Irregular. Look it up, it's not random internet nonsense, it's well established western music theory. Whether the musicians in your circles use certain terms to refer to a time signature has little bearing to what the established standard is in western music. When you refer to a Time Signature as being Duple, Triple or Quadruple, it's in relation to how many strong beats (the numbered beats) a piece contains, not how you subdivide for a particular piece (as subdivisions can change frequently within a given piece, much less every piece ever written in 3/4). 3/4 (and practically any other time signature, come to think) does not have a locked in feel that can't be changed; it ultimately depends on the composer/arranger/genre...but there are commonly used "feels".

Simple Time Signatures: any valid time signature (i.e. bottom number must be valid, so for example 3/5 would not apply haha) with 2, 3 or 4 as the top number. A beat is always equal to a regular note (i.e. not dotted) and is indicated by the bottom number. There are three types of Simple Time Sigs...

Simple Duple: any time signature with 2 as the top number. Examples: 2/2, 2/4, 2/8, 2/16
Simple Triple: any time signature with 3 as the top number. Examples: 3/2, 3/4, 3/8, 3/16
Simple Quadruple: any time signature with 4 as the top number. Examples: 4/2, 4/4, 4/8, 4/16

Compound Time Signatures: any valid time signature with 6, 9 or 12 as the top number. A beat is typically equal to a dotted note. There are also three types of Compound time sigs...

Compound Duple: any time signature with 6 as the top number. Examples: 6/2, 6/4, 6/8, 6/16

Compound Triple: any time signature with 9 as the top number. Examples: 9/2, 9/4, 9/8, 9/16

Compound Quadruple: any time signature with 12 as the top number. Examples: 12/2, 12/4, 12/8, 12/16


3/4 does not ONLY have a "duplet feel"...you can have a "triplet feel" as well...it's commonly called a shuffle and has been used for a loooooong time. Tennessee Waltz was a perfect example of a 3/4 shuffle. The term "shuffle" is another way of saying "swing" as in swinging the eighth notes, as used in jazz and country extensively (among many other genres)...it involves taking an eighth note triplet and placing emphasis on the 1st and 3rd eighth notes (or another angle: cut out the 2nd note in the triplet).

Here are the most common ways of subdividing any simple time signature (used 3/4 for relevance):

6/8 COULD be counted in a straight 6 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 ) and these COULD be subdivided as well ( 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and 5 and 6 and )

but it is typically counted with 2 strong beats (thus the Compound Duple, and in 6/8 each beat is a dotted quarter note): 1 and ah 2 and ah | 1 and ah 2 and ah |

which is technically the same as 1 2 3 4 5 6 but just stress the 1 and 4 as the strong beats: 1 2 3 4 5 6 |

If a piece sounds like it's in 6/8, but the strong beats are on beats 1, 3 and 5...or beats 1 and 3...or beats 1 and 5, then chances are it's in 3/4, not 6/8.

 

[Febs]

The easy way to think of it is that time signatures like 6/8 and 12/8 are for shuffles, swing songs, and slow rock/soul ballads, whereas 3/4 time is mostly waltzes or classical music like "Greensleeves." Or something like the beginning of this Jethro Tull classic would be written in 3/4 time:

Parts of the song are in three ("but your | new shoes are | worn at the" = 3+ |1 2 3 | 1 2 3", for example). But the guitar figure is in 6/8 (or 12/8). The eighth note stays the same, but it's counted 1 2 3 4 5 6 | 1 2 3 4 5 6.

Edit: Actually, the phrase "but your new shoes are worn at the heels" starts at the end of a 6/8 measure. If I were transcribing it, I would start the 3/4 measures at the word "new." The words "but your" would be beats 5 and 6 of the preceding measure of 6/8.

Something like this:

I think this is actually a pretty good example of the difference between 3/4 and 6/8. In the first four measures (the guitar part), you can clearly hear how the measure is divided into two groups of three eighth notes each, so the pulse is 2 beats per measure. But in the "new shoes" part, you can hear that the quarter note is the beat, so the pulse is three beats per measure. The feel changes, but the eighth note stays the same throughout.

 

[Don Kasper]

Here is a track I played on that explores a 12/8 feel.
The basic feel might be called a "half-time shuffle", a.k.a. the "Purdy Shuffle", which was championed in pop/funk by drummer Bernard "Pretty" Purdie (see/hear Steely Dan's "Babylon Sisters", ).

 

[SanDiegoHarry]

Wait until you're asked to play 6/4 time... woo hoo

 

[JollySpudd]

Can someone help me understand the difference between a 3/4 and 6/8 time signature?

I apologize if this should be in another forum

I did Google, I just need some extra one on one help

Oy.... "Now let's not bicker and argue about who killed who..."

... while people are in conflict about things being duple or triple -- for the sake of the OP, I fear it's not helping to understand the difference by counting 3's or 6's - 1/4's or 1/8's on digital paper here. Could we be be getting too heady for the question ? And indeed, I'm tempted to jump in. But....

Hopefully my dimwit answer (for as overly wordy as I'm sure it is) will get the chicken in or out of the egg for the OP.
(i hope - though you probably got it already)


A beat is almost an arbitrary thing, if you want to get "technical" or philosophical about it. One could write out a simple 4/4 song in 11/8 if you wanted to, but it would be needlessly complex and would have bar lines chopping phrases in all sorts of odd places in their flow, leaving left over beats to be written into occasional different time signatures and partial bars to make it fit.

But, honestly, the music, itself, doesn't care how you slice it - counting in one time or another is mainly aimed at respecting the musical phrase - without hatcheting it up in a hard-to-understand way - but instead it should be written (or counted) in a way that makes it easier to read and feel, according to the flow of the phrase. (ha! wish i did that with my writing )

It's a little hard to simplify it, hence part of the controversies here, because how one perceives music is - sort of - personally negotiable, by the composer, but as well as the player, interpreting it in the best way that helps us perform it best. A song in 3/4 can be written in 6/8 and vice versa, from a math technical point of view - so instead of getting abstract:

What does the musical phrase, as it repeats, say to you. Does counting it in 6 "feel" better, than counting it in 3 ?

Hopefully a composer will write it in ink in a way that respects the phrase, as well as feels best as you count it - in this case - whether in 3 or 6 (the bottom number - note value for the beat, almost doesn't matter. You can write it in 6/4 or 3/8 or 6/2 if you want, the only real affect that will have is in the ink of it and how hard or easy or impractical it is to read). -- The question is "Is it a 3 phrase, or is it better felt as a 6 phrase?" -- For example, you can count a 6 phrase in 3, but is your next 1 of 3 showing up in an awkward place where the phrase might be syncopated or not landing on the down beat and making the count "feel" clumsy? If so, consider a longer phrase of 6 as the count and see if that counting, against the phrase, "feels" better.

It almost doesn't matter matter how you count it, 3 or 6, when all the melodic or rhythmic content is in the same note value, like all 8th or other even notes, then 3 or 6 can do. But when that content has some syncopation, then it can help to better define the phrase as being more easily felt as longer or shorter. It's like, hav,ing, too ma,ny comma,s, in a sent, ence, if the melodic and/or rhythmic phrase is to chopped too much by the bar line or the count.

A waltz with an Omm-pah-pah Omm-pah-pah rhythm (like: kick snare snare) is easy to see as 3/4 since that rhythmic phrase is short. But when there is no such sub-divided short phrase like that, and, for example, the kick might fall on 1 - and if counted in 3's the snare falls on the next 1, and repeats that way, the musical phrase isn't based on alternating kick in one bar of 3, then snare in another bar of 3, but instead, the full phrase is kick-2-3-snare-5-6 much more easily; since a full phrase is one cycle of kick - - snare - - | etc.

That said, with a common waltz being in 3/4, you can dance a waltz over 6/8 with 1-2-3 1-2-3 dance steps. But the dance phrase will be in a 3 pattern, while the musical phrase can still be in a longer 6 phrase. Since they subdivide easily as triple meters (a primary subdivision of 3 beats) they can be superimposed upon each other, with no worries - although the dancers might be counting in 3 for their step phrases, while the musicians are counting in 6 for their phrases. But it doesn't matter; whatever serves the user's flow best is what matters.

That's why it gets a bit complicated, since these things can be looked at both ways, or in any way you want, chopping it up mathematically. But it's far more human and musical to choose the time signature according to the musical phrase, so that the next time it comes around in it's entirety, it lands on a strong beat, typically 1.

The phrase is the key to it, imho.


**Not always, but often, a 6/8 song will have a less bouncy drive to it than a 3/4, due to the way the phrase is divided by the underlying rhythm. Listen to the kick/snare phrasing of The Who's "Love Reign O'er Me" as an example of 6/8, or The Goo Goo Dolls "Iris". Aside from the drums, the vocal is also a longer phrase before it repeats. Then compare those to some Om pah pah waltz, where the rhythmic core of those will often be shorter phrases. (I think the reason a waltz is written/counted in 3/4 is more because the dance that the music is written for is in a 3 beat dance phrase.)

[** there aren't absolute, inalterable rules to this]

HOWEVER... In reality, you can count any of these examples however you want, The Who in 3, the waltz in 6, both will work, and neither one would be "incorrect" - though on some level (in print, or maybe how the drummer prefers to count/feel it, or according to the vocal or melodic phrase...) one might be "better" than the other.

You can count/write "Old MacDonald" out in 15/8, and it wouldn't be wrong. It would still sound like Old Mac to the ear, but writing it and counting it in 4/4 would be better, as it would respect the melodic phrase more, as well as be easier to read.

[Forum: Spare the controversies, I know that what's here is full of variables and against exacting conventions from the text books, but I prefer not to bog down the initial point.]

 

[Febs]

for the sake of the OP, I fear it's not helping to understand the difference by counting 3's or 6's - 1/4's or 1/8's on digital paper here. Could we be be getting too heady for the question ?

If the OP truly wants to understand the difference between 3/4 and 6/8, then she needs to understand what each of the numbers in those time signatures means. So I think that understanding the difference in counting threes versus sixes and quarters versus eighths is not "too heady for the question." It literally IS the question.

 

[JollySpudd]

If the OP truly wants to understand the difference between 3/4 and 6/8, then she needs to understand what each of the numbers in those time signatures means. So I think that understanding the difference in counting threes versus sixes and quarters versus eighths is not "too heady for the question." It literally IS the question.

From her question, I didn't see anything in her post that made me assume that she was completely clueless of time signature meanings and note values. She seems to only be wanting to understand the difference between 3/4 and 6/8. Not sure if that needs to be "answered" with nearly 2 pages of arguments.

"Can someone help me understand the difference between a 3/4 and 6/8 time signature?"

Maybe I took it too musically and not literally enough. The literal answer is what you're suggesting and seemed to be answered that way in the first few posts. But it almost feels like someone asking "What is the difference between red grapes and green grapes", and answering it with "well... those are red and those other ones are green". I took it as a musical perception question since time signature comes from how music is perceived.

Perhaps I misinterpreted her point. In my reading through all of the way-too-complicated answers between disagreeing parties posting - it seemed like her question got side-stepped in the academic discussion. Perhaps she is unable to count or know what 3/4 means, or doesn't know the difference between a dotted half and a 16th note. I just didn't see anything in her question to make me jump to that. 3/4 vs 6/8 ? By musical perception, it's an understandable question to ask. I've run into young drummers that, while they could count, they didn't understand the phrasing side of it. My bad.

Yet, one can count and explain note values all one wants, but those things don't really explain the difference. Mathematically, there's kinda no difference with 3/4 vs 6/8, but musically, there is. And the core difference between the two is the phrasing, which leads to the best count/feel of it, which makes each of them the different things that they are.

I agree that "counting threes versus sixes and quarters versus eighths" isn't too heady, but I do think that, per her question, 2 pages of theoretical sparing with conflicting and - to a new musician (if she is one) - confusing info - IS too heady - since some of it seems to have become about who's right and more qualified intellectually, than it is about the crux of the question. I guess I mistook the answer as largely a musical one as expressed in basic theory, not a heavily theory-drenched conflict on duple/triple semantics. That's important to get right, too, but it's just didn't seem to be answering the question.

I saw it as: Why is one piece seen as 3/4 and another seen as 6/8 ? What's the difference. We can state that "One is 1-2-3 quarter notes, and the other is 1-2-3-4-5-6 eighth notes. But does that really answer WHY they are different other than math? The why is musical phrasing. -- It's different because of how the phrasing is interpreted, after the fact of being cerebrally composed through the heart. The composer thinks it, plays it, then decides how best to write it based on the phrasing. Whether (s)he chooses to write it in 6/1, 6/2, 6/4, 6/8, 6/16, or some analogous version of 3/? will depend on other things more relevant to ink, clarity, and ease of comprehension.

I guess I have more music on the brain than math, so that's how I see the difference. Thanks for the thought.

 

[Dana R Gregory]

This is as simple as it gets: 3/4 time = a waltz and 6/8 time = Irish jig. The waltz tempo flows along smoothly and the jig tempo has a bounce to it.

 

[JollySpudd]

Parts of the song are in three ("but your | new shoes are | worn at the" = 3+ |1 2 3 | 1 2 3", for example). But the guitar figure is in 6/8 (or 12/8). The eighth note stays the same, but it's counted 1 2 3 4 5 6 | 1 2 3 4 5 6.

Edit: Actually, the phrase "but your new shoes are worn at the heels" starts at the end of a 6/8 measure. If I were transcribing it, I would start the 3/4 measures at the word "new." The words "but your" would be beats 5 and 6 of the preceding measure of 6/8.

Something like this:

View attachment 659543 I think this is actually a pretty good example of the difference between 3/4 and 6/8. In the first four measures (the guitar part), you can clearly hear how the measure is divided into two groups of three eighth notes each, so the pulse is 2 beats per measure. But in the "new shoes" part, you can hear that the quarter note is the beat, so the pulse is three beats per measure. The feel changes, but the eighth note stays the same throughout.

You've actually got a really good example of some of the things that I was saying about phrasing being the guiding point toward how to write music out. The way this chart is is showing some of the pros/cons of it.

Any idea of the source of this chart, how it was generated? I find it maybe a little odd that it jumps so much back and forth between 3/4 and 6/8, when, as you parenthetically mention, 12/8 would suit all of the phrases without the constant time signature changes. The guitar and vocal phrases all fit neatly into 12/8. Not that the way it is is wrong, by no means, but in the ink of it and in the reading of it, either 12/8 consistently, or 6/8 consistently would have saved a new reader from enduring that additional and redundant swapping of time signatures. The manuscript would be overall neater with less of that. And no less readable, but an improvement. But that's where the "doesn't mater" of my posts comes in. It can be written any way one wants, it's not wrong, but it's a matter of what's the best way. To my eyes, 6/8 throughout would be a nice compromise over 6/8 to 3/4, 6/8, 3/4, 6/8, 3/4 etc.

When I learned about manuscripting (before computers) I learned to keep it neat and uncluttered, not using needless stuff when simpler and cleaner will do. Is one time sig really neater/cleaner? idk. Manuscripting is full of creative choices, not merely practical ones. And speaking of computers, depending on how one puts in the data (or not) all sorts of automatic choices can be made by the computer that still might not be the best. But, again, it's in the eye and ease of comprehension of the creator and the beholder.

A good example, though. And it does indeed illustrate that the phrase is king in determining what count/time signature to use, as well as the fact that there is more than one "right" - "more right" or "less right" way to do this. Not sure how well it shows the difference between 3/4 and 6/8, a little, kinda, thought the full 12 phrase seems the victor
to me. It's all personal perception, I suppose. The guitar doesn't seem to shift between 3/4 and 6/8 in any uber-distinct way, does it? But it does flow cleanly in 12. Even with the vocal doing those quarters, the vocal phrase could be seen as more 6/4 in its entirety. I guess sticking to the quarters per beat in that part is neater, but that wouldn't change if written in 6/8 or 12/8.

Ha, 6 of one and a half-dozen of the other.

I'd've probably just done it in 12/8 for the fun of it, as well as to expose interested players to it so they need not fear the big, bad numbers.

Less "ink" on bar lines and time signature swaps. Half as many bars in the same space, with 12 not being too big a bite to chew. A little cleaner. But it's really a matter of taste.

 

[Lionel Albert]

6/4 is just more aware to polyrhythmic :
3 + 3
2 + 2 + 2
4 + 2

You can feel it in 18/8 if you play triplets.

You can feel it too in 4/4 in the same way we play 6/8 on 3/4 (2 beats feel).

 

[Febs]

Any idea of the source of this chart, how it was generated?

Yes. It was generated by me listening to the recording Jimmy posted and writing down what I heard.

I find it maybe a little odd that it jumps so much back and forth between 3/4 and 6/8, when, as you parenthetically mention, 12/8 would suit all of the phrases without the constant time signature changes.

I disagree. The meter changes make it easier to read than having it all in 6 (or 12) or 3. I'm on my way out the door, but I'll explain more when I get back.

 

[JollySpudd]

Yes. It was generated by me listening to the recording Jimmy posted and writing down what I heard.



I disagree. The meter changes make it easier to read than having it all in 6 (or 12) or 3. I'm on my way out the door, but I'll explain more when I get back.

It's okay to disagree, you're the publisher making your own creative choices. -- As stated, I'd only do 12/8 for fun and educational purposes, I'd otherwise stick to 6/8 as those 3/4 quarters wouldn't change. -- As scribe, it's your choice and perfectly fine, and to you, it's the better way. Personal taste. Fully in 6/8 is no better or worse, just different, and simpler, which suits my tastes. -- I wonder if Ian gave it that much thought. -- To each his own. I'd also take the other parts of the song into consideration before commiting. -- Cool. Nice work.

 

[Slevage]

In addition to feel and phrasing, "related" time signatures can be used to make notation "cleaner".

 

[Lionel Albert]

6/4 is just more aware to polyrhythmic :
3 + 3
2 + 2 + 2
4 + 2

You can feel it in 18/8 if you play triplets.

You can feel it too in 4/4 in the same way we play 6/8 on 3/4 (2 beats feel).

Yes I'm off topic, that usually happens !

 

[GreyBeard]

Music is divided into either duple (2) meter or triple (3) meter. 6/8 time means the tune is divided by six but is still classified as triple meter. If you are reading music it means that there are 6 beats in a measure and the 1/8th note gets one beat. 6/8 time is often counted in (two) grouping each measure into 2 groups of 3. These you counted in 2 like 1, and ah, 2, and ah etc. This is often how 6/8 marches are counted as they just move too fast to count in 6. 3/4 time means 3 beats in a measure and the 1/4 note (quarter note) gets 1 count. 3/4 time is rarely group as it is usually slow enough to count 3. A song with a triple meter feel can be written in 3/4, 6/8 12/8 etc. So a song written in 6/8 can sound exactly the same if written in 3/4 time and all you can really tell from listening to a song is whether it is in duple or triple meter. The time signature can be any time signature that supports the meter of the tune.

 

[tinyd]

What TuBass is trying to get across is that 6/8 is a complex time signature, that is you can feel both the 3 AND the implied 2. Either ONE two three FOUR five six (which is the 2 over 3 feel) or ONE two THREE four FIVE six.

+1. The first few bars of Invalid Link Removed illustrate this very well IMO. The conga pattern is outlining 6/8 and the bass line is more 3/4.

 

[Joshua Pickenpaugh]

What TuBass is trying to get across is that 6/8 is a complex time signature, that is you can feel both the 3 AND the implied 2. Either ONE two three FOUR five six (which is the 2 over 3 feel) or ONE two THREE four FIVE six.

+1.

 

[Febs]

I'd otherwise stick to 6/8 as those 3/4 quarters wouldn't change.

Well, if we keep it in 6/8 and we stuck with good practices in 6/8 of beaming eighth notes in groups of 3, it would look something like this:

I find that hard to read, because the feel in those measures really is a 3 feel rather than a 6 feel, and the way the notes in those measures are beamed/tied doesn't really reflect that. We could address the readability by keeping those notes as quarter notes rather than tied eighth notes:

But then you have two measures that sound like they are in 3/4, are beamed as if they were in 3/4, but are in a 6/8 key signature. Personally, I find it easier to read the way I transcribed originally, because the meter changes are clear and don't have to be inferred from the way the notes are beamed/tied. Even though there is somewhat more ink on the page, I think that is actually easier to read, rather than more difficult. I understand that your preferences may be different, and that's fine.

 

[Blackjac97]

Sorry, every person I've ever heard in my life has called any time signature with an eighth note feel as a duple feel, as opposed to a triplet feel. I'm too old to change now, no matter what random links on the Internet say

I don't care if the time signature says 19/4, it's still a duple division of beat

3/4 is simple triple. 19/4 is simple novemdecuple. 2/4 is simple duple, 4/4 is technically simple quadruple but can be argued as simple duple depending on the feel of the music.

You are mixed up. X/4 is going to be "SIMPLE X-tuple", X(divisible by 3)/8 is going to be "COMPOUND X(divided by 3)-tuple." The consistency you're trying to assert is with words "simple" and "compound," not the quantity of beats. Duple means 2. Two beats in a measure. This would be 2/4 or 6/8 depending on whether it's simple or complex.

University of Southern Maine School of Music, BA in Music...

 

[BassyBill]

This is really a matter of agreeing on terminology we use to descibe the music we hear. Terminology is about conventions rather than absolute laws and that's why there are exceptions to pretty much every rule. But conventionally speaking...

(Ed's way of representing the way to count is useful.)

ONE two THREE four FIVE six.

That's simple triple metre. Simple because each beat is split into two, and triple because there are three primary beats to the bar (as indicated by the capitalisation). 3/4 would be the most common time sig for this.

ONE two three FOUR five six.

That's compound duple metre. Compound (because each beat is NOT split into two, and duple because there are two primary beats to the bar (as indicated by the capitalisation). 6/8 would be the most logical time sig for this.

So to summarise, 3/4 is used to notate simple triple metre (1 and 2 and 3 and 1 and 2 and 3 and...) and 6/8 is used to notate compound duple meter (1 and a 2 and a 1 and a 2 and a...). That's the difference in a nutshell, so it's worth being clear about what the four bolded words in the previous two sentences mean.

Duple, triple, etc = number of primary beats in a measure.
Simple = beats are split into two, compound = beats are split up some other way (most commonly into three).

I hope that's pretty clear now for everyone.