Triplets

[projectMalamute]

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

This has already been done, but one more time. Slowly.

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

You mean if the second half of the measure had no triplet indications? Sure, I guess. 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/8 + 1/4 adds up to 5 quarter notes.

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

For like the 12th time in this thread, no. That's a bar of four quarter notes

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

If you treat it exactly as written you have a bar of 4/4. If you start making stuff up it quickly becomes pointless trying to communicate with notation.

Could it be that the triplet tie is wrong and covers one of the notes either side of the quaver in the middle accidentaly?

no.

Maybe he wanted a quadruplet tie and wrote 3 instead of 4?

no, I didn't.

My question is more of resolving the time sig of the bar or is that not important?

It's a bar of 4/4. With 4 quarter notes duration worth of stuff in it.

Great use of the word obtuse by the way, but in a word.. no

Being from Detroit I'm going to talk quarter notes/eight notes. You start throwing around terms like quavers and crumpets south of 8 Mile you might get your ass kicked. I trust you or someone else can translate.

First things first: a bar of 4 / 4 has 4 beats, each beat being a quarter note long. 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 = 4/4, or a total duration of a whole note.

An eighth note is half the duration of a quarter note. 2 eighth notes fit in the space of 1 quarter note. 8 eighth notes fit in a bar of 4/4.

A quarter note triplet is 2/3rds the duration of a quarter note, or equivalently 1/6th the duration of a whole note. 3 triplets in the space of 2 duplets. 6 quarter note triplets fit in the space of one measure of 4/4. 1/6 + 1/6 + 1/6 + 1/6 + 1/6 + 1/6 = 6/6 = 4/4 = 1 whole note.

An eighth note triplet is 2/3rds the duration of an eighth note, which is the same as being 1/3rd the duration of a quarter note, which is the same as being half the duration of a quarter note triplet which is the same as being 1/12th the duration of a whole note, or bar of 4/4.
1/12 + 1/12 + 1/12 .... + 1/12 = 12/12 = 4/4 = 1 whole note.

So:

quarter note = 1/4 of a whole note
eighth note = 1/8 of a whole note
quarter note triplet = 1/6 of a whole note
eighth note triplet = 1/12 of a whole note

measure under discussion is:

quarter note + quarter note + quarter note triplet + eighth note triplet + eighth note triplet + quarter note triplet

1/4 + 1/4 + 1/6 + 1/12 + 1/12 + 1/6

add it up, sums to 1. That's exactly one bar of 4/4.

 

[headonastick]

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

I don't understand where you're going when you say removing the triplet bracket would make it 5/4. That is indeed what would happen, but it isn't relevant because the triplet bracket hasn't been removed. A triplet is three notes of a given length played in the time normally allocated to two notes of the same length. Those three notes can be subdivided, or combined together, to form more complex rhythms. A triplet doesn't actually have to have three notes in it is the point –*it's just that you are playing the three notes, or divisions of those three notes, in the space of two notes.

All three bars in my attachment have four duplet crotchet beats in them, or six triple crotchets. There isn't anything to resolve regarding the time signature, each bar is 4/4 and has the equivalent of exactly four crotchet beats in each.

 

[megadan]

measure under discussion is:

quarter note + quarter note + quarter note triplet + eighth note triplet + eighth note triplet + quarter note triplet

1/4 + 1/4 + 1/6 + 1/12 + 1/12 + 1/6

add it up, sums to 1. That's exactly one bar of 4/4.

There it is. Thanks for summing that up PM. End of story right here.

 

[headonastick]

There it is. Thanks for summing that up PM. End of story right here.

Yup, that's the perfect explanation of it.

 

[Depth_Charge]

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.

Please accept my naivety and apologies. I'm not at a studio level and I'd made an assumption, based on my own hopes of how things might work at that level. Had I got to that level without this advice I'd have followed my own instincts based on my misinformed assumption which from the sounds of things, might not be in my best interest after all.

Regards,

 

[Fergie Fulton]

This has already been done, but one more time. Slowly.



You mean if the second half of the measure had no triplet indications? Sure, I guess. 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/8 + 1/4 adds up to 5 quarter notes.



For like the 12th time in this thread, no. That's a bar of four quarter notes



If you treat it exactly as written you have a bar of 4/4. If you start making stuff up it quickly becomes pointless trying to communicate with notation.



no.



no, I didn't.



It's a bar of 4/4. With 4 quarter notes duration worth of stuff in it.



Being from Detroit I'm going to talk quarter notes/eight notes. You start throwing around terms like quavers and crumpets south of 8 Mile you might get your ass kicked. I trust you or someone else can translate.

First things first: a bar of 4 / 4 has 4 beats, each beat being a quarter note long. 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 = 4/4, or a total duration of a whole note.

An eighth note is half the duration of a quarter note. 2 eighth notes fit in the space of 1 quarter note. 8 eighth notes fit in a bar of 4/4.

A quarter note triplet is 2/3rds the duration of a quarter note, or equivalently 1/6th the duration of a whole note. 3 triplets in the space of 2 duplets. 6 quarter note triplets fit in the space of one measure of 4/4. 1/6 + 1/6 + 1/6 + 1/6 + 1/6 + 1/6 = 6/6 = 4/4 = 1 whole note.

An eighth note triplet is 2/3rds the duration of an eighth note, which is the same as being 1/3rd the duration of a quarter note, which is the same as being half the duration of a quarter note triplet which is the same as being 1/12th the duration of a whole note, or bar of 4/4.
1/12 + 1/12 + 1/12 .... + 1/12 = 12/12 = 4/4 = 1 whole note.

So:

quarter note = 1/4 of a whole note
eighth note = 1/8 of a whole note
quarter note triplet = 1/6 of a whole note
eighth note triplet = 1/12 of a whole note

measure under discussion is:

quarter note + quarter note + quarter note triplet + eighth note triplet + eighth note triplet + quarter note triplet

1/4 + 1/4 + 1/6 + 1/12 + 1/12 + 1/6

add it up, sums to 1. That's exactly one bar of 4/4.

Thank you for that concise lesson in maths but that was never the problem i had..... or am indeed questioning if you had read my previous posts in this matter.
As i know things in the USA are different in some points of theory, as the way you talk in 1/4 and 1/2 notes and that is not a problem to me.
But correct me if i'm wrong please, and i'll paragraph these points so you can help me when you or anybody else replies but;

Grouping of notes are so to show the beat?

This bar example should show 4 x 1/4 beats

The example in post 11 shows three of the 1/4 beats if the triplet grouping is to reflect the beat.

We are now a 1/4 beat missing to resolve the bar.

I earlier suggested that the triplet tie(beam) may be wrong.

If the beam is altered to take in only 3 of the 4 notes currently shown under it, which in my mind would be one of the 1/4 notes and the two 1/8 notes the problem is resolved.

My concerns have been about the grouping shown in post 11, not what the whole bar splits down to or adds up to.

That is why i would question it if it appeared in a score because the beat has changed in respect of maintaining 4/4. For all the others that have taken the time to post in this matter their examples clearly show the beat, unlike the example in post 11 and it is that and that i question and have only ever questioned.

 

[projectMalamute]

Thank you for that concise lesson in maths but that was never the problem i had..... or am indeed questioning if you had read my previous posts in this matter.
As i know things in the USA are different in some points of theory, as the way you talk in 1/4 and 1/2 notes and that is not a problem to me.
But correct me if i'm wrong please, and i'll paragraph these points so you can help me when you or anybody else replies but;

Grouping of notes are so to show the beat?

This bar example should show 4 x 1/4 beats

The example in post 11 shows three of the 1/4 beats if the triplet grouping is to reflect the beat.

We are now a 1/4 beat missing to resolve the bar.

I earlier suggested that the triplet tie(beam) may be wrong.

If the beam is altered to take in only 3 of the 4 notes currently shown under it, which in my mind would be one of the 1/4 notes and the two 1/8 notes the problem is resolved.

My concerns have been about the grouping shown in post 11, not what the whole bar splits down to or adds up to.

That is why i would question it if it appeared in a score because the beat has changed in respect of maintaining 4/4. For all the others that have taken the time to post in this matter their examples clearly show the beat, unlike the example in post 11 and it is that and that i question and have only ever questioned.

You've got to be kidding me.

I'm done.

 

[headonastick]

Each note, from left to right, in post 11 is as follows: crotchet (1/4), crotchet (1/4), triplet crotchet (1/6), triplet quaver (1/12), triplet quaver (1/12) [with the two triplet quavers being equivalent to one triplet crotchet], and triplet crotchet (1/6). It is no different to any other example, and it is completely clear.

There are two normal crotchets and three triplet crotchets, and those triplet crotchets take up the same time as two normal ones, so that is 4/4. The triplet bracket MUST cover the notes that it does in the example because if it didn't THEN there would be a problem. I honestly can't see why you think that the example in post 11 is any different from the others that I've posted. The triplet bracket changes the length of the notes under it. You are speaking as if it has no effect on their length.

 

[Fergie Fulton]

The triplet bracket MUST cover the notes that it does in the example because if it didn't THEN there would be a problem.

The first crotchet is one, the second crotchet is two, the first note of the triplet shown is 3 where is 4?

What is the count under the triplet bracket and where is the beat please.

Lets remove the triplet beam and start again.
I put it that the first crotchet is 1, the second crotchet is 2, the third crotchet is 3 and what is left if tied (beamed) under the triplet the first note is 4. This resolve the committment to the 4/4 time signature.
Its a question of correct grouping, not how to play a triplet which was answered way before i got involved.

 

[headonastick]

The first crotchet of the triplet doesn't last for all of beat three though. You're thinking that there has to be a note placed on every beat, but that isn't necessarily the case with triplets. As it happens, the second of the triplet quavers would land on beat 4, but if it was three triplet crotchets then there wouldn't be any beat landing on beat 4 exactly. The first crotchet and quaver of the triplet bracket complete beat 3, the second quaver and crotchet complete beat 4. Beats 3 and 4 are in a sense divided into three triplet quavers, so one triplet crotchet and one triplet quaver completes each beat. The grouping is correct.

 

[Febs]

Fergie, can we agree that the definition of a quarter note (crotchet) triplet is three quarter notes (crotchets) played in the space of 2 quarter notes (crotchets)? And can we further agree that the example measure attached to this post has four beats, no more, and no less?

 

[megadan]

Febs that is absolutly correct as I see it. I also see how it would be easy to misunderstand the example, since it looks like 2 quarter notes, followed by a triplet, which leaves a missing bit.

But of course it doesn't, since the triplet takes place within the space of beats 3 and 4.

1 - 2 - trippuhlet
1 - 2 - 3 - 4

Let me try and line it up for you Fergie:

1 e & a 2 e & a 3 e & a 4 e & a
1 - - - 2 - - - 3 --  puh -- let

You can see the same thing here if you don't believe me:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyrhythm#Examples

 

[Fergie Fulton]

Fergie, can we agree that the definition of a quarter note (crotchet) triplet is three quarter notes (crotchets) played in the space of 2 quarter notes (crotchets)? And can we further agree that the example measure attached to this post has four beats, no more, and no less?

We can indeed, all i'm doing is pointing out that in reading the bar in question it is better to show the beat for ease. If anyone who read the first of my posts on this matter would see. I know that the beat does not have to fall at the start its what happens in between the beats that count. All so your triplet notes are of equal value, not nessesarly add up to that value of the two in many different ways, which an eary posting was pointing out when i agreed with that statement.

Thats when the fun started. All i'm doing is seeing who understands my position and show there are different ways of doing things. My experience which is long and vast still make me question things as i accumulate new information After all, this started as a basic post about triplets, so i assume the OP needs basic information about it, so let him see the beat till he can feel it for himself, then let him( or others) explore other concepts. Lets start seeing the beat in simple time before we move on. Everything else posted is just single minded, misunderstood, or a pack mentality, which in music will always jump up and bite your arse or is that ass LOL.

Great software that you and others have that lets you notate, could make my life easier to be digital, rather than hand written LOL what is it i might have to invest in some? Great looking site and music with the Jump City jazz Orchestra as are some of the other links.

 

[Jake of Bass]

Fergie, can we agree that the definition of a quarter note (crotchet) triplet is three quarter notes (crotchets) played in the space of 2 quarter notes (crotchets)? And can we further agree that the example measure attached to this post has four beats, no more, and no less?

Indeed. Triplets can be considered a measure of compound time in what is overall a simple time signature.

 

[Fergie Fulton]

Febs that is absolutly correct as I see it. I also see how it would be easy to misunderstand the example, since it looks like 2 quarter notes, followed by a triplet, which leaves a missing bit.

But of course it doesn't, since the triplet takes place within the space of beats 3 and 4.

1 - 2 - trippuhlet
1 - 2 - 3 - 4

Let me try and line it up for you Fergie:

1 e & a 2 e & a 3 e & a 4 e & a
1 - - - 2 - - - 3 --  puh -- let

You can see the same thing here if you don't believe me:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyrhythm#Examples

Thanks but i know whats going on and always did i was just shown different ways a triplet could be used to show the beat and its duty to the bar. Letting the post run and taking the flak was the best way to see who runs with it and who turns and runs.
Its the old thing on the web ..who is just quoting souces or who really understands what is being put. Its easy to point to a site or quote a source. What i was looking for was those with the balls, right or wrong to speak their thoughts and take the time to understand.
Like i said if i had any doubts i'd ask.

 

[Bassgrinder77]

Triplets are 3 in the space of two.
Quarter note triplets take the time of a half note.
Eighth note triplets take the time of a quarter note.
In a triplet, the individual notes don't take the normal amount of time - they're shorter. For example, a note from a quarter note triplet is shorter in duration than a normal quarter note.

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.

 

[john turner]

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

there's nothing wrong with the bar posted in post #11, and that kind of thing is actually -quite common-.

the only thing that is required of a triplet is that each of the three elements of the tuplet had the same duration. they have no need of all being the identical notes.

again, you might want to refresh your knowledge of music theory before you go about posting things that are wrong.

 

[Febs]

We can indeed, all i'm doing is pointing out that in reading the bar in question it is better to show the beat for ease.

I think that the example in post 11 does show the beat, and that the orchestrator's intent is clear. It is the same figure as what I posted in my example, only with the middle quarter note broken down into two eighth notes.

All so your triplet notes are of equal value, not nessesarly add up to that value of the two in many different ways, which an eary posting was pointing out when i agreed with that statement.

I think that this may be at the heart of the confusion. As others have pointed out, the notes within a tuplet do not necessarily have to be of the same value. For example, a quarter note triplet can have a half note and a quarter note, and that is perfectly clear.

With that said, I can't recall ever seeing an example in practice of a note in a tuplet being shorter than the note defining the tuplet. For example, I cannot recall ever seeing an eighth note within a quarter note triplet as in our example, and I wonder whether is correct notation.

I'm thinking that as a general practice, the tuplet should be defined by the smallest note duration within the tuplet. I'm attaching an example based on the figure we've been discussing. The first measure is the figure we have been talking about. The second and third define the tuplet as a 6:4 eighth note tuplet (i.e., 6 eighth notes in the space of 4).

As I mentioned above, I think that the intention of the figure we've been discussing (measure one of my example) is clear, but if the pair of eighth notes had been at the beginning of the quarter note triplet, that would be confusing, as one would expect a triplet that starts with two eighth notes to be an eighth note triplet (i.e., three eighth notes in the space of two) rather than a quarter note triplet with the first quarter note subdivided into a smaller subdivisions. After all, if the figure had been comprised of six eighth notes instead of three quarter notes, we wouldn't write that as a quarter note triplet, with each quarter note broken down into two eighths; we would write it as an eighth note sextuplet. Thus, I think that measures two and/or three of the attached example might be the better practice.

Surprisingly, I haven't been able to get a good answer on this question doing some Google searches. Does anyone have any thoughts on which of these is the better notation practice?

Great software that you and others have that lets you notate, could make my life easier to be digital, rather than hand written

To make these examples, I downloaded the 30-day trial of Finale Allegro. I own a copy of Finale, but it's an older version and not installed on this computer.

 

[Fergie Fulton]

I think that the example in post 11 does show the beat, and that the orchestrator's intent is clear. It is the same figure as what I posted in my example, only with the middle quarter note broken down into two eighth notes.



I think that this may be at the heart of the confusion. As others have pointed out, the notes within a tuplet do not necessarily have to be of the same value. For example, a quarter note triplet can have a half note and a quarter note, and that is perfectly clear.

With that said, I can't recall ever seeing an example in practice of a note in a tuplet being shorter than the note defining the tuplet. For example, I cannot recall ever seeing an eighth note within a quarter note triplet as in our example, and I wonder whether is correct notation.


Surprisingly, I haven't been able to get a good answer on this question doing some Google searches. Does anyone have any thoughts on which of these is the better notation practice?



To make these examples, I downloaded the 30-day trial of Finale Allegro. I own a copy of Finale, but it's an older version and not installed on this computer.

I think this may be at the heart of the matter i am questioning. I have no software so i am limited only by my imagination within my duty to theory and notation. I have been around to a friend who is a great arranger and he has said some software will reflect a software writers preference for certain things. We discussed the post bar 11 for the want of a better topic name and he would not note it the way with the tied quavers (1/8 notes) but untied just for clarity. The two play the same but one shows your duty to the beat clearer.
But when we enter it in computer software, some will allow it to tie the quaver (1/8) and some won't under the triplet tie (bar).
So maybe this is where the true problem is.... software.
I was amazed if not staggered at some of the triplet division it could do to the bar 11 example. Not only could it notate a 1/128 triplet on the bar but i could voice it as well... OMFG. I think i will stick to hand notation as software like that could ruin my life LOL. Great for practicing sight reading if you have the voice one, i reckon you could get some mean licks in you head.

 

[onlyclave]

I think this may be at the heart of the matter i am questioning. I have no software so i am limited only by my imagination within my duty to theory and notation. I have been around to a friend who is a great arranger and he has said some software will reflect a software writers preference for certain things. We discussed the post bar 11 for the want of a better topic name and he would not note it the way with the tied quavers (1/8 notes) but untied just for clarity. The two play the same but one shows your duty to the beat clearer.
But when we enter it in computer software, some will allow it to tie the quaver (1/8) and some won't under the triplet tie (bar).
So maybe this is where the true problem is.... software.
I was amazed if not staggered at some of the triplet division it could do to the bar 11 example. Not only could it notate a 1/128 triplet on the bar but i could voice it as well... OMFG. I think i will stick to hand notation as software like that could ruin my life LOL. Great for practicing sight reading if you have the voice one, i reckon you could get some mean licks in you head.

I think you need to understand the difference between "Tied" and "Beamed". It is quite significant and affects the rhythm dramatically.