Metric Modulation not respected
Moderators: Peter Thomsen, miker
- motet
- Posts: 8225
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:33 pm
- Finale Version: 2014.5,2011,2005,27
- Operating System: Windows
Does Human Playback recognize those? I'm not sure. I would just set the playback tempo of "quarter = dotted quarter" to dotted quarter = 149 and be done with it. Of course if you use that elsewhere and the tempo is different, you'll need to make a new one.
Unsolicited advice: standard metronome marks include 144 and 152. I would use one of those instead.
Unsolicited advice: standard metronome marks include 144 and 152. I would use one of those instead.
- apkyburz
- Posts: 179
- Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 9:50 am
- Finale Version: 26 (+TG, Pattsn, JW)
- Operating System: Mac
Ye, I guess you're right. I did it with hidden text.motet wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 6:48 pmDoes Human Playback recognize those? I'm not sure. I would just set the playback tempo of "quarter = dotted quarter" to dotted quarter = 149 and be done with it. Of course if you use that elsewhere and the tempo is different, you'll need to make a new one.
Unsolicited advice: standard metronome marks include 144 and 152. I would use one of those instead.
- zuill
- Posts: 4418
- Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 9:35 pm
- Finale Version: Finale 2011-v26.3.1
- Operating System: Windows
There's no need for a hidden expression. Just change the existing expression for the proper tempo. If you need that same expression elsewhere with a different tempo, just make a duplicate of the original first. This is the same advice Motet gave earlier (and you quoted in your post). Maybe you weren't sure what he was saying.
Zuill
Zuill
Windows 10, Finale 2011-v26.3.1
"When all is said and done, more is said than done."
"When all is said and done, more is said than done."
- apkyburz
- Posts: 179
- Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 9:50 am
- Finale Version: 26 (+TG, Pattsn, JW)
- Operating System: Mac
Ah, I see.zuill wrote: ↑Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:39 amThere's no need for a hidden expression. Just change the existing expression for the proper tempo. If you need that same expression elsewhere with a different tempo, just make a duplicate of the original first. This is the same advice Motet gave earlier (and you quoted in your post). Maybe you weren't sure what he was saying.
Zuill
Yes, you're right, I didn't understand your suggestion quite right, Motet. That's a great idea, and much cleaner.
Thanks to both of you.
- motet
- Posts: 8225
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:33 pm
- Finale Version: 2014.5,2011,2005,27
- Operating System: Windows
Traditionally, composers and editors have stuck to a common subset of numbers (e.g., 60, 72, 80, 108, etc.). One also saw these as settings on mechanical metronomes. As such, conductors tend to be familiar with the feel of these. The difference between 120 and 122, say, is not going to be noticeable, and tempo is going to vary from performance to performance, so most people stick to the common subset.
But I withdrew my criticism above--if the composer wants to specify something very precisely, why not, as I said?
But I withdrew my criticism above--if the composer wants to specify something very precisely, why not, as I said?
- apkyburz
- Posts: 179
- Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 9:50 am
- Finale Version: 26 (+TG, Pattsn, JW)
- Operating System: Mac
Interesting, thanks for the share!motet wrote: ↑Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:02 pmTraditionally, composers and editors have stuck to a common subset of numbers (e.g., 60, 72, 80, 108, etc.). One also saw these as settings on mechanical metronomes. As such, conductors tend to be familiar with the feel of these. The difference between 120 and 122, say, is not going to be noticeable, and tempo is going to vary from performance to performance, so most people stick to the common subset.
But I withdrew my criticism above--if the composer wants to specify something very precisely, why not, as I said?
The music in my example above is a cue for moving picture, that's why the tempo is so specific.