8

I am confused about a solution to a question in my music theory exercise book. The answer is shown in an image below (the one in 10/16 time). From what I understand, the rests should fit into the beats of Strong-Weak-Medium-Weak.

Doesn't it make more sense to have the dotted eighth rest on the medium beat instead of the final weak beat? That way the sixteenths are grouped like 3-2-3-2. Is my thinking wrong here? I am new to this so I could be mistaken or just unaware. Perhaps both 3-2-3-2 and 3-2-2-3 are valid but one is preferable? Could someone shed some light on my confusion here?

One measure in the time signature 10/16: sixteenth note, sixteenth rest, sixteenth rest, eighth rest, eighth rest, dotted eighth rest

Edit: It is probably too late now, but here is the question from the book. Next time, I'll be sure to include the question too.

Question from music theory exercise book: "Add rests under the brackets to complete the following measures." Four incomplete measures with the time signatures 10/16 are shown. The first has a sixteenth note and a large gap (marked by a bracket). The second has a dotted eight note and a gap. The third has an eighth note and a gap. The fourth has a large gap and a sixteenth note.

Elements In Space
  • 13,682
  • 4
  • 29
  • 78
Marek Ceglowski
  • 83
  • 5
  • 2
    First, your strong-weak-medium-weak axiom doesn’t hold up in general. 2nd, in 10/16 there are 10 different beats, so it really doesn’t hold up. You did not mention the original question so any answers are speculation: The only valid part of the book answer is that you can’t subdivide rests, which is why they’re written the way they are. The way the book is written the metric subdivision is 3+2+2+3. The metric grouping needs to reflect the impulses of the music. In the absence of context, a 10/16 measure, or any measure, can be subdivided a number of ways. Only providing 1 answer is asinine. – jjmusicnotes Aug 20 '20 at 02:59
  • 3
    The rests in the 10/16 bar are grouped to show a bar-division of 3+2+2+3. The only reason for dividing an almost empty bar that way is that there is some other instrument, or the left hand of the piano, playing notes in that grouping. Or because it says "3+2+2+3" over the the music just after the time signature. Which it doesn't. – Old Brixtonian Aug 20 '20 at 03:02
  • 1
    Related to this question – Aaron Aug 20 '20 at 03:18
  • Oh okay I see. I am mixing up both the terminology and concepts. Thank you for helping me understand. – Marek Ceglowski Aug 20 '20 at 05:07
  • I meant to say pulses when I said beats. I understand this is a very elementary mistake and makes it more confusing. Hopefully these comments hell clear up what I was trying to ask a little bit. – Marek Ceglowski Aug 20 '20 at 05:15
  • We need to see the question! In the answer, there's a semi note in bar 1, a dotted quaver in bar 2, so a pattern may be emerging which shows how the 10 is actually split - there are several ways, but seeing only 2 bars isn't enough info. – Tim Aug 20 '20 at 06:47
  • @jjmusicnotes unless the tempo were very slow, I don't imagine that it would be fruitful to count 10/16 in 10. It would more likely be a compound meter with four beats of varying length, where the long beats are 50% longer than the short. In such meters, the distinction between long and short typically replaces or at least overshadows the system of strong and weak beats. For example, 7/8 is sometimes short-short-long, sometimes long-short-short. (Alternatively, since 10 is even, you could look at it as 5/4 with syncopation, similar to 3+3+2 in 4/4, an option unavailable with 7/8.) – phoog Apr 27 '21 at 14:27
  • @phoog ...uh...yup...and? I'm not sure the point of your man-splaining comment? With any compound / asymmetric meter the count reflects the subdivision using 123 the appropriate counts for the length of the beat. Nobody counts in 10 or any other compound / asymmetric meter until the tempo is slow or you're counting Carnatic rhythms. Comments like this why I don't come around this site anymore. – jjmusicnotes Apr 27 '21 at 15:54
  • @jjmusicnotes the point of my comment was that "in 10/16 there are 10 different beats" is generally not correct. Your use of the word "mansplaining" is not appreciated. – phoog Apr 27 '21 at 19:37
  • @phoog no, it's exactly correct, the time signature is 10/16. 10 beats per measure, 16th-note gets the beat. You are confusing beats with pulses. "Beats" are how note divisions are represented visually, "pulses" are what we feel. With compound / asymmetric meters pulses are subdivided with different beat groupings. I've got 3 advanced degrees in this; I don't need ham-fisted remedial definitions. It might not be appreciated, but it's apt in this circumstance. Yup, I'm a jerk sometimes. It happens. – jjmusicnotes Apr 27 '21 at 20:38
  • @jjmusicnotes just as a 6/8 bar most frequently has two beats rather than six, a 10/16 bar will most frequently have four rather than ten. So no, it's not correct at all. This distinction you're trying to make between beats and pulses is entirely artificial, and this isn't the first time someone with an advanced music degree has presented me with incorrect assertions about their field, apparently not knowing that I too have advanced music degrees. If you are rude again, I will flag your contribution for the moderators. – phoog Apr 28 '21 at 00:20
  • @phoog 6/8 = 6 beats per measure, 8th-note is represented as the beat. You're describing strong / weak pulses; these are fundamentally different things. Considering your aforementioned advanced music degrees, your cognitive dissonance on this topic is surprising if not impressive. I would suggest that necro-commenting a response to a comment I made on a post almost 10-months ago with factually incorrect information is less helpful than my sometimes abrasive personality. Rest assured: further responses aren't worth my time or effort; comments are not for discussion. – jjmusicnotes Apr 28 '21 at 12:55
  • @jjmusicnotes you're confusing fact with opinion, but the consensus seems to be on my side. Each of three sources I've found online supports the assertion that the beat in a compound meter is the dotted note: (1) https://milnepublishing.geneseo.edu/fundamentals-function-form/chapter/4-compound-meters/ (2) https://dolmetsch.com/defsc2.htm (3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metre_(music)#Compound_metre -- can you find a single source that supports your opinion? – phoog Apr 28 '21 at 15:46
  • What is the symbol which looks like a backwards S with a diagonal line attached to it? – Vighnesh Oct 02 '23 at 14:26

1 Answers1

10

NOTE: See bottom of post for edit in light of new information since the original answer

There are two sets of pulses involved here: the "small" pulses -- in groups of 3 or 2 -- and the "large" pulses -- of which the exercise, as you've described it, requires four total. It sounds like you're conflating the "large" pulse strength with the duration of that "large" pulse (that is, its 3-ness or 2-ness). But they're independent. Whether the rhythmic ("small") grouping is 3-2-3-2 or 2-3-2-3 or 3-2-2-3, the metric ("large") pulse maintains its own pattern. When the meter comprises four main pulses, it frequently follows the strong-weak-medium-weak pattern (frequently, but not always).

In the specific example you're showing, the key to the "small" grouping is the duration of the rests: so, 3-2-2-3.

strong  weak  medium  weak
   3     2       2      3

Here are some additional examples of how the notation reflects the "small" groupings, but the metric pulse (the "large" groupings) remains the same.

X:0
T:3+2+3+2
K:C
M:10/16
L:1/16
"strong"F z z "weak"z2 y"medium"z3 yy"weak"z2 |

X:0
T:2+3+2+3
K:C
M:10/16
L:1/16
"strong"F z "weak"z3 y"medium"z2 yy"weak"z3 |

X:0
T:3+3+2+2
K:C
M:10/16
L:1/16
"strong"F z z "weak"z3 y"medium"z2 yy"weak"z2 |

EDIT

Since posting the answer, the textbook question that prompted the OP is posted. As @Mycroft points out below (comments), and assuming every measure is expected to use the same rhythmic grouping, the first grouping must be 3, because the second measure contains a dotted eighth-note.

Based on this and this (rules for rest placement), the initial 3-groups must be filled out with sixteenth rests. Since the rests begin on a weak (part of the rhythmic) beat, we must fill the space with sixteenth rests.

Beyond that is conjecture.

Conjecture...

I believe the book is at fault for not specifying the possibility of multiple answers. However, if there are rules demanding 3+2+2+3, then I would suggest these:

  1. A compound meter with an even number of beats should be divided into equal parts, so in the case of 10/16, 5+5. This requires 3+2 for the first half-measure.
  2. Empty space should be filled with rests in ascending order of duration, corresponding to the "large" metric beats. So that would mean 2+3 for the second half of the measure, rather than 3+2.
Aaron
  • 87,951
  • 13
  • 114
  • 294
  • What language is that? You've lost me. – Old Brixtonian Aug 20 '20 at 03:15
  • @OldBrixtonian I don't understand your comment. My explanation isn't clear? The ABCjs code isn't displaying properly? Something else? Let me know, and I'll fix. – Aaron Aug 20 '20 at 03:17
  • How weird! It looks fine now. But a few minutes ago it looked like code. It started 'x=0'. I don't know what ABCjs is. – Old Brixtonian Aug 20 '20 at 03:21
  • 1
    @OldBrixtonian Yeah, I had never heard of ABCjs either. Discovered it here on MP&T. It's a language for specifying music notation. Pretty handy. The post to get you started is this one on Meta. The display problem was because I goofed the syntax: "X=0" should have bee "X:0". – Aaron Aug 20 '20 at 03:23
  • Wow! So I don't have to use Sibelius every time. (As long as it can do irrationals!) Reading about it now. Thanks! – Old Brixtonian Aug 20 '20 at 03:31
  • Thank you, I believe I understand the difference between rhythmic and metric pulses now. I missed this in my original question but the book's question only gave the sixteenth note and asked me to fill in the rests. The answer key sometimes mentions "there can be multiple answers" but it did not in this case, so I was a bit confused. My original answer looked like your first example. – Marek Ceglowski Aug 20 '20 at 05:21
  • 2
    Can't see how the answer (in the exercise) should be 'the' correct answer. There just aren't enough clues - what am I missing? – Tim Aug 20 '20 at 07:06
  • You're not missing anything. Without "3+2+2+3" written above the time sig there are no clues. – Old Brixtonian Aug 20 '20 at 14:54
  • @Tim: Possible, but we haven’t seen a scan of the the actual question — often when people paraphrase a question, they leave out or accidentally change an important detail, not realising its importance. – PLL Aug 20 '20 at 15:40
  • I have added the question in an edit. Next time I'll be sure to include the question from the start. – Marek Ceglowski Aug 20 '20 at 18:18
  • I can't figure out why it's 3+2+2+3 either, but I don't think it can be be 2+3+2+3 (or 2+anything), because the second bar of the sample starts with a dotted eighth. – Mycroft Aug 20 '20 at 19:32
  • 1
    A gentle warning to budding composers: you write something in 10/16 and I will hunt you down, and your family, and your friends... (The Usual Suspects). In all seriousness, anything other than a 5+5 rhythm, which would be better written as 5/8 anyway, would be more show than quality. – Carl Witthoft Aug 21 '20 at 13:10
  • "assuming every measure is expected to use the same rhythmic grouping": that assumption could well be incorrect, though for a pedagogical problem like this, it may be reasonable. @Mycroft it's obviously confusing to vary the grouping in a complex meter such as this, but it certainly happens. The alternative, scattering measures of 3/8 and 5/8 in among measures of 2/4 and 3/4, is somewhat less ambiguous but difficult to read. – phoog Apr 27 '21 at 14:17