Triplets

[bassinplace]

Hello,

I was just wondering; are triplets composed of eighths or sixteenths?

The reason I ask is the piece of music I'm working on right now has a measure that starts with a half note followed by two triplets (in 4/4). The first note of the first triplet is an eighth rest (so that means eighths, right?). What I'm getting hung up on is does the eighth rest fall on "3" or the "and" before 3? I'm a little confused on this.

 

[DudeistMonk]

A triplet is 3 notes in the space of a single quarter note. usually written as 3 eighth notes grouped together with the number 3 under them...or some other notation at the top of the piece indicating what a triplet looks like.

When you see a song written in 12/8 time its so that the 8th notes can actually be triplets without any extra notation.

play with a metronome and play 3 notes for every one click...your playing triplets.

 

[onlyclave]

Ok, so triplets are an rhythmic device that are an equal division of 3, hence the name Triplet. A triplet takes up the total of 2 of the notes lengths that are written. That is a quarternote triplet is 3 notes of equal length in the space of 2 quarternotes. An eighth note triplet is 3 notes of equal length in the space of 2 eighth notes.

In the sample that I have provided notice that all bars are the same length long, 4 beats. The triplets on the top line correspond to 2 of the notes in the bottom line.

The "galloping" Eighth-sixtheenth-sixteenth rhythm so common in Iron Maiden's music is NOT a triplet. That is simply three notes. Triplets are equal time divisions.

 

[bassinplace]

Triplets are a division of a quarter note into 3 parts. If you're looking for how it fits in compared to eighth notes, the first one goes on the count, the second after "e" and before "and" and the third after "and" and before "a"

I'm kind of bad at explaining things, so I'm sorry if this isn't helpful.

Actually, yeah, I think that explains what I was wondering pretty well. Thanks!

 

[NickInMesa]

View attachment 119302The "galloping" Eighth-sixtheenth-sixteenth rhythm so common in Iron Maiden's music is NOT a triplet. That is simply three notes. Triplets are equal time divisions.

That is correct.

Triplets are sometimes not of equal time division, I have heard and played tied triples. See popular example below.

 

[projectMalamute]

you cannot mix the note values within the triplet, such as say a 16th and 8th and a 16th as they would not be considered to have equal value, therefore not to be considered triplets.

why not?

 

[Oric]

As far as I see it, a triplet divides whatever rhythm is normally divided by that note into three. Quarter note divides a half note into two, triplet quarter notes divide a half note. Triplet eighth notes divide a quarter note into three. This can be applied to any number, you can have quintuplets or whatever. It's pretty logical once you think about it.

 

[Fergie Fulton]

I'm not quite sure how you're suggesting that the example shown should sound, but it definitely isn't ambiguous. The example given is no more ambiguous than a triple grouping with one quaver followed by a crotchet, or a crotchet followed by a quaver. A triplet quaver is half the duration of a triplet crotchet, so the notes under the bracket still last exactly two duplet crotchet beats. There is absolutely no ambiguity about how it should be read, the quavers are triplet quavers, not duplet quavers.

I am definately not saying the're duplet quavers, so here is my thought process;

It has the letter C at the start which to me is 4/4 time sig.

So my bar must add to four beats to conform to this time sig.

The first two crotchets are fine and uses two beats and take me up to the 4 notes under the triplet which will be played as one beat.

But now i am a beat short to resolve my commitment to the 4/4 time sig.

So i would play the first 3 notes as crotchets which is 3 beats and play the last three under the triplet as one beat thus i have played four beats in the bar which resolves my time sig. and commitment to the triplet.

Thinking about it in duplets take me to compound time sigs which 4/4 is not, and something i would not consider as option because the C has indicated to me a 4/4 time sig. which is a simple time sig.

So for me i have four notes, two of which are of a different value. For me a triplet is a group of three notes or rests played in the time of two notes or rests of equal value. which i don't have under this triplet. So as i stated, i would ask what is being said in the piece at that point.

So where have i misunderstood this one bar or have i just not explained myself well?

The OPs question was answered as far as standard triplets were concerend earlier in the post this is an extention from it.

 

[zeppelinfreak]

Some of the stuff said in here is wrong.

Triplets can be of any note value, half notes, quarter notes, 8th, 16th, etc.

 

[headonastick]

I am definately not saying the're duplet quavers, so here is my thought process;

It has the letter C at the start which to me is 4/4 time sig.

So my bar must add to four beats to conform to this time sig.

The first two crotchets are fine and uses two beats and take me up to the 4 notes under the triplet which will be played as one beat.

But now i am a beat short to resolve my commitment to the 4/4 time sig.

So i would play the first 3 notes as crotchets which is 3 beats and play the last three under the triplet as one beat thus i have played four beats in the bar which resolves my time sig. and commitment to the triplet.

Thinking about it in duplets take me to compound time sigs which 4/4 is not, and something i would not consider as option because the C has indicated to me a 4/4 time sig. which is a simple time sig.

So for me i have four notes, two of which are of a different value. For me a triplet is a group of three notes or rests played in the time of two notes or rests of equal value. which i don't have under this triplet. So as i stated, i would ask what is being said in the piece at that point.

So where have i misunderstood this one bar or have i just not explained myself well?

The OPs question was answered as far as standard triplets were concerend earlier in the post this is an extention from it.

I have bolded what I think is the misunderstanding. There are 3 triplet crotchets under the triplet bracket, it's just that one of the crotchets is divided into two quavers. There is no necessity for all the notes in a triplet to be of the same note value.

For example, the attachment I've posted shows a quaver and a crotchet under a triplet bracket, indicating three quavers in the time of two, with two of those triplet quavers taken by a crotchet. The notes can't have to be the same length, because in my example you could just tie the second and third quavers together and achieve the same effect, but it wouldn't be as easy to read.

 

[Fergie Fulton]

I have bolded what I think is the misunderstanding. There are 3 triplet crotchets under the triplet bracket, it's just that one of the crotchets is divided into two quavers. There is no necessity for all the notes in a triplet to be of the same note value.

For example, the attachment I've posted shows a quaver and a crotchet under a triplet bracket, indicating three quavers in the time of two, with two of those triplet quavers taken by a crotchet. The notes can't have to be the same length, because in my example you could just tie the second and third quavers together and achieve the same effect, but it wouldn't be as easy to read.

Great stuff and thanks for talking rather than just commenting with out taking on my problem. But i see how the triplet works not problem. Like i said if it was put in front of me i would question it. I understand that triplets can be many things and a have notes in them that will break down for ease of reading. Like a blues shuffle will for ease of reading have the 3 above or below the notes rather than under a tie or will be shown at the start of the piece.
Your new example is not a problem as it can be split in to three half notes played to one beat.
But back to the bar in question,

If i take away the the triplet tie i have 5/4?
If i have the triplet tie as shown to me that is 3/4?
If i treat one of the crotchets under the triplet as a lead in note, or exit note i will have 4/4?

Could it be that the triplet tie is wrong and covers one of the notes either side of the quaver in the middle accidentaly?
Maybe he wanted a quadruplet tie and wrote 3 instead of 4?
My question is more of resolving the time sig of the bar or is that not important?

 

[projectMalamute]

But i see how the triplet works not problem.

I don't think you do. That's what several people have tried to explain to you already.

All of the following are exactly two quarter notes long. No more, no less.

 

[Depth_Charge]

If I had to question a piece of music handed to me during a session I'd be concerned doing so may hilight a failing in my ability to read music or play along. Considering the weight of consensus in this thread I think it's better not to question the music and play it best you can. Maybe then if there is an error in interpretation either way, it can be discussed and clarified? Just thinking aloud before I go study triplets again to clear my own mind of this confusion!!

 

[Febs]

But back to the bar in question,

Are you still talking about measure 8 of the "Carry On Wayward Son" example? If so, there absolutely nothing ambiguous about that measure.

If i take away the the triplet tie i have 5/4?

No. Are you talking about removing the triplet bracket, or removing the tie? Either way, the answer to your question is "No."

As written, it is a measure of 4/4, with each beat of the measure consisting of an eighth note triplet. Some of those eighth notes are rests, and some are tied, but each gets exactly the same duration. If you take away the tie, then you would play two notes that are each 1/3 of a beat instead of playing one note that is 2/3 of a beat, but the number of beats in the measure is exactly the same.

If you take away the triplet bracket, then you have four and a half beats in the measure.

If i have the triplet tie as shown to me that is 3/4?

No. Again, removing a tie does not change the meter.

If i treat one of the crotchets under the triplet as a lead in note, or exit note i will have 4/4?

No. I have no idea what you mean by "lead in note" or "exit note." And now I wonder if we're talking about the same example, because I don't see any quarter notes under a triplet in the Kansas example.

 

[Febs]

If I had to question a piece of music handed to me during a session I'd be concerned doing so may hilight a failing in my ability to read music or play along. Considering the weight of consensus in this thread I think it's better not to question the music and play it best you can.

Errors in charts happen all the time, especially if the charts are hand-written. For example, it's not unusual to see a measure where the copyist forgot to put a dot on a quarter note, so the measure only has 3 1/2 beats instead of four. There's nothing wrong with questioning the accuracy of a chart, especially when there is an obvious error like my example.

 

[Fergie Fulton]

More confusion, so sorry Febs. The bar i'm talking about is in post 11. All other things talked about and posted stem from this, so this where the confussion is. The wayward son is fine as is most of what is being said. The fact i can't notate here is adding to the confusion. check post 11 and join the dots to my last post you so concisly answered.
As for questioning things in charts, i would consider it a failing in ability if you did not questions something you do not understand.
It would also indicate a certain arrogance that you know all the answers to everything in music....so question what you don't understand.....like i'm doing here.
I must note that some of the answers posted on this thread come in hard with no substance to back up the post?

 

[Fergie Fulton]

This thread is way too complicated for something as simple as triplet

Thats because you don't understand the problem being asked to solve, like so many that give standard answers on how to play a triplet. Look at post 11. and question how you resolve that bar to the time signature written? PDA

 

[projectMalamute]

Thats because you don't understand the problem being asked to solve, like so many that give standard answers on how to play a triplet. Look at post 11. and question how you resolve that bar to the time signature written? PDA

Are you being intentionally obtuse or have you just failed to read the several posts that have already explained this to you?

Look at my second set of examples until things become clear. Or re-read the several posts explaining this to you. Or follow either of the links to other sites which explain this.

 

[Fergie Fulton]

Are you being intentionally obtuse or have you just failed to read the several posts that have already explained this to you?

Look at my second set of examples until things become clear. Or re-read the several posts explaining this to you. Or follow either of the links to other sites which explain this.

If it is that simple why don't YOU look at the bar posted in post 11 and YOU explain it to me please?


If i take away the the triplet tie i have 5/4?
If i have the triplet tie as shown to me that is 3/4?
If i treat one of the crotchets under the triplet as a lead in note, or exit note i will have 4/4?

Could it be that the triplet tie is wrong and covers one of the notes either side of the quaver in the middle accidentaly?
Maybe he wanted a quadruplet tie and wrote 3 instead of 4?
My question is more of resolving the time sig of the bar or is that not important?
Great use of the word obtuse by the way, but in a word.. no

 

[megadan]

Thats because you don't understand the problem being asked to solve, like so many that give standard answers on how to play a triplet. Look at post 11. and question how you resolve that bar to the time signature written? PDA

Are you referring to this:
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=119431&d=1235225491 ?

There's nothing wrong with that as written. Imagine a triplet:

1 - 2 - 3

Then play the 2 broken evenly in half: 1 - 2& - 3

It doesn't change the time signature in anyway. You have to understand the root idea of a triplet: Play x beats in the space of y. The space of y stays absolutely the same, generally, a quarter note, and so nothing in the time signature changes anymore than if there was a quarter note written in the same space.

There is NO change in the time signature. I would agree that it could be mistaking for intending 3/4, which would make "C" incorrect; however my gut would be to go with layed out time signature, 4/4; if it was intended to change to 3/4 it would say so, using a triplet will not on any level change the time sig.

I'm not a theory buff, I'm just working on common sense here. I think you're over thinking it. Listen to the piece, and play it how it sounds.