rebeaming in a composite time signature

[bj nick]

I have to do a Bartok orchestration exercise and the time signature is 3+3+2/8. The eighth notes all come out as single notes; I'd like them to be beamed in groupings of 3, 3, and 2, as they are in the original piece I see in front of me. So that they will look like 2 triplets followed by 2 eighth notes. How do I do this? I've tried messing with "rebeam" without success. Thanks!

[motet]

Use this for both time signature (for future notes) and Rebeam to Time Signature (for already-entered notes).

[bj nick]

Perfect! Worked like a charm and now I get how to use it for the future. Thanks very much. Now I just have to ask this Bartok guy why he had to use the complex time signature when it sure feeeeeels like a simple 4/4......

[Peter S.]

You do not have to ask Bartok...

3+3+2/8 is NOT the same as 4/4 as you can see on the beaming and as you could hear on the accents.

>..>..>. vs. >.>.>.>.

Peter

[bj nick]

Oh, I agree with you regarding the accents etc, but I would say one could write that entire piece in 4/4 (or rather, cut time) with the accents properly marked and it would work just fine. I'd venture to guess that any contemporary composer would write it that way, not with the complex time signature. But recognize that I come from a jazz/commercial background and have only recently begun to seriously explore classical music. I'm sure my ignorance is on full display, but I'm always happy to learn!

[Peter S.]

For me as a classical musician it is much easier to read the beams and mark the first note than to read 4/4 with accents...

[motet]

I'm not sure you need to accent notes in such meters. Bartok was exploring Hungarian and other eastern European folk music, where such composite time signatures are common. Once you get use to it you just sort of feel it instinctively. If you're old enough, remember how "Take Five" was considered unusual and difficult back in the day? Nowadays, old hat.

[bj nick]

Interesting comments. Motet, I agree: 5/4 and other time signatures are no big deal these days. Peter, I appreciate you sharing your take as a classical musician, since I have little exposure in that area (but it's growing.) Here's the piece in question. My assignment is to orchestrate the first 20 bars for string orchestra. I'm a novice writing for strings, so it's valuable training. As far as the 3+3+2/8, obviously this is strongly accented in the left hand figures (but moves back and forth between LH/RH.)

https://youtu.be/VEsMk3DAzWM

[Peter S.]

I'm not sure you need to accent notes in such meters. Bartok was exploring Hungarian and other eastern European folk music, where such composite time signatures are common. Once you get use to it you just sort of feel it instinctively. If you're old enough, remember how "Take Five" was considered unusual and difficult back in the day? Nowadays, old hat.

In 4/4 you would need accents to get the rhythm you want, in 3+3+2/8 you do not need accents, easy to read...

[zuill]

Over the years I always thought (in fun) of 3+3+2 as a Scherzo (fast 3, in 1) with a limp.

Zuill

[Anders Hedelin]

Over the years I always thought (in fun) of 3+3+2 as a Scherzo (fast 3, in 1) with a limp.

Zuill

Actually that's exactly what I'm told by Hungarian and Bulgarian musicians: 3+3+2 really is a kind of 3/4 "with a limp". This kind of irregular rhythm is called "aksak", which sholuld mean "limp", if I'm right. Found especially in traditional Bulgarian dance music.

Interesting phenomenon though - have the musicians adapted to dancers who are not too steady on their feet, or have the dancers adapted to too happy musicians?

[Michel R E]

Over the years I always thought (in fun) of 3+3+2 as a Scherzo (fast 3, in 1) with a limp.

Zuill

I always thought of Brubeck's "Blue Rondo a la Turk" as a 4/4 with a limp!