This is a weird question for English-speaking musicians in countries other than the USA:
Are instrumental students in general taught to play by rote or by understanding what the notation means?
For example, in the U.S., to give an amateur performer on a band or orchestral instrument a series of dotted eighth notes, as showing divisions of dotted quarter notes into two equal sub-beats rather than the normal three, will totally stump them. They see that first dotted eighth and assume that the next note will be a sixteenth, because they’re learned by rote what so-called ‘dotted rhythms’ sound like. Never mind that two dotted eighths in a row are technically equal in duration, they can’t ‘feel’ it that way because they are used to the dotted-eighth-followed-by-a-sixteenth pattern.
The same exact musician can read eighth note ‘duplets’ in 6/8 time just fine. They just can’t understand how the two different approaches can mean the same thing.
Do students and other amateur musicians in the UK, for example, suffer from this same phenomenon?
Perhaps this will make more sense if I give notation examples of what I’m talking about:
All of these mean absolutely the same thing, that is, they all sound exactly alike assuming the clef is the same in all instance. And the final example is by far the cleanest and easiest to write. Yet, in my experience, amateur musicians and students of band instruments have no clue how to play it. They can sort of figure out how to play the third example, but much prefer the second, assuming it’s too short a passage to justify changing the meter.
I’m just wondering if this is a US problem or more widespread.
I’m not sure it is the case even throughout the U.S. It would depend on the quality of the music program involved.
I dare say I prefer the second example, but the fourth doesn’t bother me. Unless there were some particular rhythmic reason for it, the third example would strike me as less than clear.
If it is played in a jazz context, I can imagine the second example will be played straight and the fourth example could be played with a swing interpretation. So they don’t sound the same then.
For reading I prefer the fourth example. I’m from the Netherlands.
Anecdotally, I think duplets in compound time signatures go down quite well all the way up to professional musicians – it helps clarify the relationship between the duplets and the prevailing compound feeling; encourages the performer to lean into the cross-rhythm.
I would hope that anyone learning anything is taught to understand, rather than just do it by rote.
I’d argue that the tied note version is more complicated to process, and would not be as quickly and easily read as either the dotted notes or the duplets, even if the reader understands them all.
But of course, familiarity is nine tenths of the law. I dare say that once you’ve seen a dotted pair in 6/8, you’ll be fine with it the next time.
I also don’t think it is a question of professional vs. amateur or US vs international. The second version has been most commonly used; the fourth considered a little esoteric and less used. The fourth version is often used where there is a counter melody in 16th notes on the same staff to clarify it.
Lately I have been recopying Scriabin’s first Piano Sonata from the original edition, in which I find indiscriminate switches between duplets and dotted eighths in an inner voice, presumably copying the composer’s manuscript faithfully.
In terms of pedagogy, a demo is worth any number of printed examples. How to play duplets in compound meters at various tempi is as much a matter of learning the feel as counting. Play it while the student reads the part, have them play it with you, and point out the subtleties of rhythm as you repeatedly play.
It’s no use expecting students to “get the rhythm” off the page by themselves with no player to model. This applies to any notation they haven’t seen before, even straight quarter notes.
From a classical perspective, I prefer the second. The first is just unnecessary, and the third is near impossible to read (although Maarten’s point is valid). The last one is common and can be swapped with the second.
And the last is Dorico’s default suggestion (in the absence of explicit duplets - though personally I’d prefer a whole bar 4:6e rather than two duplets)
There are exceptions, but tuplets are almost always a larger note duration contracted to fit into a smaller one. If this was 3/4 instead of 6/8, a 4:3 quarter note tuplet would almost certainly be used instead of eighths.
I love the way you worded this. When I write duplets in compound meter, 99.9% of the time, it’s because I deliberately want the contrast with the compound, so “leaning into” it, as you phrased it, is precisely what I want the musicians to do. I agree with you that a duplet seems to communicate this more than the dotted rhythms do. Not sure why it feels that way, but it strikes me that way.
I find this fascinating. I’m self taught on piano and I was struggling to understand what the “2” meant in the song “Loanna” by Yiruma. I find your 4th example the easiest to understand as it accounts for each beat in the 6/8, whereas just a “2” with only four notes did not make sense.
Just to clarify. I’m not talking about a teaching scenario. (In which case I would totally agree with you.) I’m talking about writing music to be performed by students I have never met. In a band or other ensemble. Which will be the easiest for them to sight-read from day one. I’d prefer to always use example 4, but that totally bewilders most of the performers I know. They much prefer #2.
At q.=120, I would prefer the duplet. At q. = around Andante, the dotted version. At e = around Andante, number 3 would make the most sense to me.
Of course, I’m talking about what would make my prima vista work better in each case. If I had time to study the score and put it under my pillow before the rehearsal, any version would do.
I’m not sure what you mean - I’d have to see an example of it. Im guessing you’re asking if the music was written in 2/3 time instead of 6/8 time, but as a sight reader with no good music theory/education I’d have to see an example to answer of it would make sense or not.
