Hello! I’ve been notating scores by HT Burleigh. I’ve seen this unusual duplet notation that looks redundant.
The first time I saw it I thought it was a mistake, but it happens often enough in Burleigh’s music that I think it’s intentional. I’m trying to figure out what he means by it. I wonder if it means a lengthening of the beat, or more specifically, lengthening so that the beat is two-thirds of a triplet. Does anybody know?
Judging by the preceding two bars, the music appears to be in 3/4 time. Strictly speaking, the duplet is unnecessary as two quarter notes in the time of one really equals two eighth notes. My thinking is that Burleigh has created a visual reinforcement of the rit., stretching out those two notes but perhaps not so much that it could be notated as (and sound like) a 4/4 bar. Some composers might notate this as two eighth notes with tenuto marks and maybe even add something such as più rit.. Despite my instinctive reaction to object to how this is notated, I find myself appreciating the psychology of it.
Your thoughts on this are similar to mine. He uses rit., molto rit., and piu rit. throughout, but this seems to be different. I think a 4/4 bar would be slightly too long than a stretched beat.
My guess is that the bar with the duplet should be taken as four beats (the half note plus the two quarter notes) fitting in the same time as a 3/4 bar. This is not unusual or difficult to play or sing, especially if the tempo is fast enough to feel the rhythm as one beat/pulse per bar. Another way of notating it would be to make the half note a dotted quarter note, and each duple quarter note a dotted eighth note.
Same. To me as someone teaching rhythm and rhythmic notation to gifted teens at music university, this is close to gore, but I can’t help myself admiring the creativity behind this.
