Is 3/8 compound time or simple time? Options

[linda.ff]

Do they not admit of the possibility of a quaver beat? What would they make of 5/8?

That gets put under the heading 'complex'. I can't see how that's an appropriate description of 1/4.

No, but it's probably an accurate description of a quaver being a beat, as is 3/8

[kenm]

I'm intrigued: Tell us the other story. Please?

I can't tell it shortly, but it is explained in Willi Apel's book, "The Notation of Polyphonic Music 900-1600", in 30 pages starting at 87.

There is a more recent sort of time signature, invented by Carl Orff, in which the lower number is replaced by a note image showing the length of a beat, and the upper one by the number of beats. 3/8 is then either 1/(dotted crotchet) or 3/(quaver). See Other Variants in the Wikipedia explanation of time signatures.

[Tenor Viol]

It's simple triple.
Has to be a multiple of 3 but not 3 itself for compound time.
If it was compound it would be one in a bar and by the same reasoning 3/4 would also be compound as is 6/4.

What sbhoa said. If the "how many of these are there in a bar" number is 3, then it is simple (3/4, 3/8, 3/2 etc). To be compound it must be a mutliple of 3 (6/2, 6/4, 6/8, 9/8, 12/8 etc).

This is one of the weaknesses of our notation system. Medieval and early Renaissance notation had much better way of doing this, but that's another story (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I'm intrigued: Tell us the other story. Please?

OK

This is mensural notation. Until C13th ish there was no means of notating accurately the temporal relationship between different parts. You could indicate the length of a note (a longa or a breve etc). What you couldn't do was say show a hemiola with a triplet in one line against a duplet in another.

They came up with a clever solution. They realised that there was a problem in that sometimes you wanted to count in groups of two and sometimes in groups of three. But, they also realised that sometimes you want to subdivide the unit of the pulse (which they called tactus) into 2 and sometimes into 3. Two different things.

There are therefore FOUR possible combinations:

Count in three, divided in three
Count in three, divided in two
Count in two, divided in three
Count in two, divided in two.

Counting in three is called tempus perfectum (by association with the Trinity)
Counting in two is called tempus imperfectum
Dividing in threes is called prolatio major
Dividing in twos is called prolatio minor

Still with me? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wacko.gif)

So, you had a SYMBOL which was the time signature and it told you which of the above you had. So,

A circle with a dot inside it means Tempus Perfectum Prolatio Major = 9/8
A circle, no dot inside means Tempus Imperfectum Prolatio Minor = 3/4
A semi-cicle (like a C) with a dot inside it means Tempus Imperfectum Prolatio Major = 6/8
A semi-circle (like a C) with no dot means Tempus Perfectum Prolatio Minor = 2/4

The last one is the only one still in use and is the root of the "C" for so-called 'common time'.

There's a full explanation in here or Google 'mensural notation'.

This enabled music of immense rhythmic complexity, such as the isorhythmic motets of the C13th and C14th - Dunstable, Dufay, Machaut etc.

I need a lie down.... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wacko.gif)

EDIT: text highlighted in blue has been changed to fix error caused by posting complex messages at nearly 01.00 in the morning! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

[katica]

It's simple triple.
Has to be a multiple of 3 but not 3 itself for compound time.
If it was compound it would be one in a bar and by the same reasoning 3/4 would also be compound as is 6/4.

What sbhoa said. If the "how many of these are there in a bar" number is 3, then it is simple (3/4, 3/8, 3/2 etc). To be compound it must be a mutliple of 3 (6/2, 6/4, 6/8, 9/8, 12/8 etc).

This is one of the weaknesses of our notation system. Medieval and early Renaissance notation had much better way of doing this, but that's another story (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I'm intrigued: Tell us the other story. Please?

OK

This is mensural notation. Until C13th ish there was no means of notating accurately the temporal relationship between different parts. You could indicate the length of a note (a longa or a breve etc). What you couldn't do was say show a hemiola with a triplet in one line against a duplet in another.

They came up with a clever solution. They realised that there was a problem in that sometimes you wanted to count in groups of two and sometimes in groups of three. But, they also realised that sometimes you want to subdivide the unit of the pulse (which they called tactus) into 2 and sometimes into 3. Two different things.

There are therefore FOUR possible combinations:

Count in three, divided in three
Count in three, divided in two
Count in two, divided in three
Count in two, divided in two.

Counting in three is called tempus perfectum (by association with the Trinity)
Counting in two is called tempus imperfectum
Dividing in threes is called prolatio major
Dividing in twos is called prolatio minor

Still with me? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wacko.gif)

So, you had a SYMBOL which was the time signature and it told you which of the above you had. So,

A circle with a dot inside it means Tempus Perfectum Prolatio Major = 9/8
A circle, no dot inside means Tempus Imperfectum Prolatio Minor = 3/4
A semi-cicle (like a C) with a dot inside it means Tempus Perfectum Prolatio Major = 6/8
A semi-circle (like a C) with no dot means Tempus Imprefectum Prolatio Minor = 2/4

The last one is the only one still in use and is the root of the "C" for so-called 'common time'.

There's a full explanation in here or Google 'mensural notation'.

This enabled music of immense rhythmic complexity, such as the isorhythmic motets of the C13th and C14th - Dunstable, Dufay, Machaut etc.

I need a lie down.... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wacko.gif)

That was interesting and helpful. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

You might want to edit your entry slightly, I think. If I've followed you correctly, the "circle no dot inside" symbol would actually be Tempus Perfectum Prolatio Minor, wouldn't it? Because you count three but would divide in twos. And then the "semi-circle with a dot inside" would have to be Tempus Imperfectum Prolatio Major because you count in two and divide in threes. Right? Or have I missed something?

Nothwithstanding the knowledgeable French pupils' explanation, I still can't understand 3/8 as compound time. As others have commented above, I understand it as simple triple time like 3/4 and 3/2.

There seems to be something in the French logic that is about adding up instead of breaking down. Must ask my teacher how it's understood over here.

[owainsutton]

Nothwithstanding the knowledgeable French pupils' explanation, I still can't understand 3/8 as compound time. As others have commented above, I understand it as simple triple time like 3/4 and 3/2.

With pupils who do a decent amount of ensemble playing, I reinforce compound time with the question of 'What would you expect to see the conductor do?' 6/8, you're looking for two beats. 3/4, three.

3/8? It depends on context and tempo, you might be looking for three beats, or one compound beat. Hence the ambiguity.

[sbhoa]

Nothwithstanding the knowledgeable French pupils' explanation, I still can't understand 3/8 as compound time. As others have commented above, I understand it as simple triple time like 3/4 and 3/2.

With pupils who do a decent amount of ensemble playing, I reinforce compound time with the question of 'What would you expect to see the conductor do?' 6/8, you're looking for two beats. 3/4, three.

3/8? It depends on context and tempo, you might be looking for three beats, or one compound beat. Hence the ambiguity.

But would that make 3/4 compound when conducted/counted 1 in a bar?

[owainsutton]

But would that make 3/4 compound when conducted/counted 1 in a bar?

Yep, I suppose it would, but I'd suggest it's less common. Anyway, that reinforces my point, that the theoretical descriptions fall short of covering all eventualities.

[linda.ff]

But would that make 3/4 compound when conducted/counted 1 in a bar?

Yep, I suppose it would, but I'd suggest it's less common. Anyway, that reinforces my point, that the theoretical descriptions fall short of covering all eventualities.

I think we're probably all agreed on that last point.

What we don't seem to all agree about is whether or not you can have one beat in a bar (throughout, not just an isolated "hiccup" bar) and whether a quaver beat is avalid object.

And if 3/8 can't be simple time, where does that leave the relationship of 3/4 and 3/2? If I write out the same melody three times, once in ech time-signature, with the same metronome tempo per "lower figure" beat, is just one of them in compound time?

[agricola]

How do you conduct 1 in a bar ?

[Roseau]

How do you conduct 1 in a bar ?

A bit like bouncing a ball - a clear down movement and it bounces up again quickly.
I don't really know how to explain but it is very clear when someone shows you.

[owainsutton]

And if 3/8 can't be simple time, where does that leave the relationship of 3/4 and 3/2? If I write out the same melody three times, once in ech time-signature, with the same metronome tempo per "lower figure" beat, is just one of them in compound time?

Again, I'm not saying that 3/8 is compound, just that it's inaccurate or at least incomplete to say that it is simple time (except when taking a theory exam!). Otherwise, if I take a melody that's in 6/8, and divide every bar in half to create 3/8 bars, we're saying that it's somehow acquired all these extra beats...

[anacrusis]

So is 3/4 compound as well, if 3/8 is?

For me the difference lies in the "feel" - 6/8 and up have that umpty umpty umpty ompompom feel to them - and as much as anything, 6/8 can behave both as six in a bar and two in a bar, but when you try to make it three in a bar, you get a hemiola (which makes me fall over). The limping sense of the pulse is not really there in 3/8, it feels more even. I know the "compound" refers to combination of crotchet and quaver in a bar, but to me the compounding bit also belongs to that idea of being able to think of the pulse in the bar in two ways - then complex becomes the next stage up, where those compounded components are also not equally sized. If that makes sense....?

[linda.ff]

And if 3/8 can't be simple time, where does that leave the relationship of 3/4 and 3/2? If I write out the same melody three times, once in ech time-signature, with the same metronome tempo per "lower figure" beat, is just one of them in compound time?

Again, I'm not saying that 3/8 is compound, just that it's inaccurate or at least incomplete to say that it is simple time (except when taking a theory exam!).

I think it's in simple time in Fur Elise.

Really the compound/simple question has to be one of how you read the music, not how you play it - in other words the maths of the matter, not a performance detail. Compound, as you said before, indicates bigger units made of smaller ones. You seem to be suggesting that "1" can be the "number of bigger units" - even when just reading, with no indication of tempo. In that case most music would be compound, surely? 4/4 time is one unit divided into 4?

[owainsutton]

You seem to be suggesting that "1" can be the "number of bigger units" - even when just reading, with no indication of tempo. In that case most music would be compound, surely? 4/4 time is one unit divided into 4?

I fail to see why a fast one-in-a-bar 3/8 can't be described as compound. Excluding 'single compound' simply because it's not in the ABRSM theory syllabus doesn't make sense. And no, it's about groups of three, not four.

So is 3/4 compound as well, if 3/8 is?

Did I say anywhere that either are compound?

[anacrusis]

So is 3/4 compound as well, if 3/8 is?

Did I say anywhere that either are compound?

was I quoting you (IMG:style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)?

My question was rhetorical. Baroque players like rhetoric....