How relevant is getting your time signature "right" in MIDI?

[AROIOS]

I've seen countless straight 8-Beat and 16-Beat tunes bearing a 4/4 time signature on published scores, not to mention swing and shuffle beats what are more like 6 and 12 beats hidden behind a disguise of 4/4.

 

In a computer sequencer, none of that time signature mumble jumble matters as long as you get the tempo and the relative position of the notes right. It's all just simple math based on multiples of 2s and 3s (not considering the less common beats like 5 and 7 for now)

 

It seems to me that the time signature convention, along with staff-based Western notation system, are relics that confuse more people than they help.

 

I'd appreciate any response that demonstrate a practical case, e.g. for noting an 8-beat or 16-beat pattern as 4/4. Please try you best to not be pedantic. Thanks.

[AROIOS]

Here's one example of an utterly useless, pedantic explanation of two time signatures that are functionally identical as far as a midi sequencer is concerned.

 

[Mike Kent]

Yes, time signature is still relevant.

It's useful if you want the sequencer/DAW to generate a click to record to.

It's useful if you want to synchronize devices using a MIDI clock.

It's useful if you want a sequencer to perform quantization.

It's useful if you want a sequencer to apply grooves.

It's useful if you want an adjustable amount of swing.

It's useful for complex arpeggiator patterns.

[Tusker]

I find that we have musical conventions and traditions and "feelings" which distinguish between time signatures. Are such conventions valuable and to whom? That would be the follow on question ... perhaps such conventions are not for everyone. And not all the time.

 

For example, 2/4 is the same as 4/8, correct? Yet with 2/4 we often "feel" two differently stressed beats (oom-pah) suggesting a march feel. (Left foot right foot) Not everyone is familiar with these conventions and we are long past the early 20th century when a brass band marching past your neighborhood was the closest you could get to watching a flash mob on youtube, lol. Similarly, 3/4 and 6/8 have different social conventions associated with them. I would not write a waltz in 6/8. (Although I have been known to sequence it in 6/8 to see the subdivisions and available polyrhythms more clearly.)

 

One related incident happened just this week to me... My daughter is taking an urban dance class. She calls and asks me "Dad, what is the difference in feeling between the down-beat and the back-beat?" Dad is delighted to hear a music question and quickly responds with "well if you have four beats in a bar, the downbeat would be the first beat and the back beat would be the third beat," (Yes I SAID that.) Minutes later I am on the internet where everyone knows that the back beat is 2 and 4. Ouch. How to fix this?

 

So I call my daughter back and say "the backbeat well it could be the third but more commonly it's 2 and 4. Aimee Nolte says it's the 2 and the 4 and she is the bees knees. It all depends on how you CHOOSE to write it." I left out the part where most people write it as 2 and 4, lol. My daughter dreams in math, and fiercely defensive of her father, so she goes, "That makes sense, we CAN count it how we like." So then the two of us work some exercises where we can focus on the back beat, and then the down beat. She learns how to feel it. Confusion averted.

 

So there you go. It matters for some people some of the time.

 

The amazing Aimee Nolte ...

 

[video:youtube]

 

When it comes to micro-rhythms, even a sequencer grid has difficulty. So perhaps we use time signature where it helps, a sequencer grid where it helps, and old fashioned "feel" when it helps?

 

[video:youtube]

[ElmerJFudd]

Of course time signature matters because time matters in music. It"s what makes what might be just sounds into music, no?

 

Just because common time dominates pop music doesn"t mean humans arent making plenty of other styles and genres that employ different meters.

 

DAWs offer a metronome for a reason, and the metronome has many settings for a reason. It"s called feel. Meter matters, strong and weak beats matter. What the grid is crappy at is swing and feel. Drum loops are preferable to the metronome, finding the right tempo (it"s rarely a whole number) is worthwhile, ignoring the grid when making music that uses time as an expressive element, all important in music making. Even on computers.

[analogika]

I've seen countless straight 8-Beat and 16-Beat tunes bearing a 4/4 time signature on published scores, not to mention swing and shuffle beats what are more like 6 and 12 beats hidden behind a disguise of 4/4.

 

In a computer sequencer, none of that time signature mumble jumble matters as long as you get the tempo and the relative position of the notes right. It's all just simple math based on multiples of 2s and 3s (not considering the less common beats like 5 and 7 for now)

I don't understand. That is literally what a time signature *is*: a way to write down the combination of multiples of 2 and/or 3 needed to play a piece.

 

Are you asking what use it is when you're talking to a computer? Because in my world, a considerable amount of music is still played by *people*, who will often reference common notation to be on the same page, as it were.

 

As for the "disguise": Swing is usually notated as 4/4 with a note above saying that two written quavers are actually triplets consisting of a quarter and an eighth note, because it's easier to read that way. 12/8 is different, because it assumes that the second triplet is also going to be played.

 

if it's 12/8, I WRITE 12/8, not least because writing everything in 4/4 and adding triplet brackets across everything is annoying.

[Docbop]

There is time signature and how you feel the beat. Talking with my old guitar teacher who played with Richard Bona for awhile. There was a tune she was never sure how to feel so she asked Richard if to feel it in 3 or 4. Richard said it doesn't matter that he will change how he feels the songs on different nights.

 

 

Notation can never say how to Swing or Groove you have to feel it, so your ears and gut always have the final say.

[MathOfInsects]

Count me among the lost.

 

OP, out of curiosity, as part of your musical practice, do you play with other musicians?

[GovernorSilver]

On the Audiobus forum and other electronic music oriented forums, there's always somebody looking for a sequencer that will let them compose in an odd time signature like 11/8, or put together a song that changes from 7/4 to 6/8. There are also peeps looking for a sequencer that supports polyrythms and/or Euclidean rhythm.

 

So yeah, time signature is very relevant to these people

[ElmerJFudd]

On the Audiobus forum and other electronic music oriented forums, there's always somebody looking for a sequencer that will let them compose in an odd time signature like 11/8, or put together a song that changes from 7/4 to 6/8. There are also peeps looking for a sequencer that supports polyrythms and/or Euclidean rhythm.

 

So yeah, time signature is very relevant to these people

 

There are a few iOS apps an plugs like BreakTweaker that allow for way more interesting rhythmic design. Layerinf different metered tracks on top of each other. Subdividing beats into any odd or even number to the most minute of fraction of a beat. Electronic music doesn"t have to be in 4/4 with 8 or 16 beat patterns.

[GovernorSilver]

On the Audiobus forum and other electronic music oriented forums, there's always somebody looking for a sequencer that will let them compose in an odd time signature like 11/8, or put together a song that changes from 7/4 to 6/8. There are also peeps looking for a sequencer that supports polyrythms and/or Euclidean rhythm.

 

So yeah, time signature is very relevant to these people

 

There are a few iOS apps an plugs like BreakTweaker that allow for way more interesting rhythmic design. Layerinf different metered tracks on top of each other. Subdividing beats into any odd or even number to the most minute of fraction of a beat. Electronic music doesn"t have to be in 4/4 with 8 or 16 beat patterns.

 

 

Yes, there's a pretty good selection of apps in IOS that will let you sequence in non 4/4 time signatures: SunVox, Nanostudio 2, Drambo, Gadget, Patterning 2, Korg iMS-20 (did a 13-beat drum beat on that once), Poly 2 (by James Milton), miRack, Mozaic, etc.

 

My OP-1's Endless sequencer has hidden Euclidean sequencing functions.

 

My Octatrack supports any pattern length up to 64 steps, so odd time is possible, as well as multiple time signatures simultaneously, although the hard core theory nerds will debate whether it's polymetric or polyrhythmic.

 

I bought Ableton Live 11 a couple of months ago. If you've heard Pat Metheny on his Orchestrion tour, you probably heard Ableton Live in action as a sequencer, and you know any time signature is game for Pat. It just didn't sound like electronic music because he had Live triggering robots playing acoustic instruments like drums and cymbals. Once I get a new Macbook Pro, I'll probably spend a lot more time on that and less on IOS.

[ElmerJFudd]

Don"t kill a groove just because you have the tools.

[video:youtube]

 

 

Break Tweaker

[video:youtube]

[GovernorSilver]

[video:youtube]

[Marzzz]

I have looked into this with Logic yet, but I am wondering if there is a DAW that allows you to just record without any time signatures or divisions or anything, like it was just one long tape? I guess you can just record that way and ignore the DAW display?

[ElmerJFudd]

All of them. Just record and ignore the grid, yes. Follow the time or time code ruler and hide the bars and beats. Whatever the software allows you turn on and off regarding time. Word of advice though when multitracking in layers... If the tune has a live drummer, record that first - it"s always loose as all hell if you start with tracks that don"t flesh out the time for everyone else.

For free you can use Audacity it"s not much for tempo, bars and beats.

[mcgoo]

Yes, time signature is still relevant.

It's useful if you want the sequencer/DAW to generate a click to record to.

It's useful if you want to synchronize devices using a MIDI clock.

It's useful if you want a sequencer to perform quantization.

It's useful if you want a sequencer to apply grooves.

It's useful if you want an adjustable amount of swing.

It's useful for complex arpeggiator patterns.

 

+1 AND, if you ever happen to do any music editing for a cheer leading squad, you'll find life far easier if you set your time signature to 8/4 and tempo match your cuts to the project tempo.

[Mike Warren]

Apart from agreeing with most of the replies I'd just like to point out that "time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so." [Douglas Adams]

[AROIOS]

Thanks everyone for chiming in. After thinking about the topic a bit more, I realize that my original title ("Is Time Signature still relevant in the Computer Age?") was misleading. What I really intended to ask is:

 

With the convenience of MIDI sequencers, how relevant is it to get your time signature "right"? (I've modified the title for better clarity)

 

To me, music is fundamentally about pitch (frequency) and time.

 

Harmony deals with spacing of pitches (frequencies). Rhythm deals with spacing of time (more specifically, positions of notes/strokes relative to one another in the time dimension)

 

Following that intuition, it's obvious that what's most distinctive about a harmonic pattern (chord) or rhythmic pattern is the RELATIVE positions of notes on the frequency dimension and time dimension. And that's precisely why Piano Roll as a 2-dimentional tool is so effective in representing music.

 

As Tusker and I hinted, a 4/4 rhythm pattern at 120BPM is sonically identical to its 4/8 equivalent at 60BPM, or its 4/16 equivalent at 30BPM; and if its a swing or shuffle pattern, also identical to its 6/8 or 12/16 equivalents at their respective tempo.

 

The root of the issue I have with time signatures, is the crude/vague definition of note duration in the Western musical notation. For example: how many mill-seconds should a quarter note last? I'm not looking for a exactly number but a range.

 

At the upper bound, let's say 4/4 at 40BPM, a quarter note translate to a 1.5 second duration; at the lower bound, let's say 4/4 at 160BPM, a quarter note translate to 0.375 second duration.

 

You can see how widely the actual duration of a quarter note may vary, and how blurry the boundaries between it and half notes, whole notes, 8th notes could become as we change the tempo.

 

In fact, I think the reason Western notation stopped at the resolution of 32nd notes is only because that's the density of notes that still makes sense to our human hearing. Nothing prevents 1/64th notes and 1/128th notes from making sense to the ears of other species.

 

The beauty of a MIDI sequencer in the context of time signature consideration is its resolution (Ticks Per Beat). Even at the lower end of 120 Ticks Per Beat, it offers us plenty of ways to slice a beat/bar into multiples of 2s and 3s and align notes to their RELATIVE positions in a grid. As long as a bar is clear defined, and as long as the duration and RELATIVE positioning of the notes is maintained, it seems incidental how we designate a time signature to our tunes.

[AROIOS]

Yes, time signature is still relevant.

It's useful if you want the sequencer/DAW to generate a click to record to.

 

Yes, metronome is a simple but important function dependent on time signatures. But it's trivial in MIDI to lay down a few strokes or even an elaborate rhythm pattern in loops to serve that purpose.

 

It's useful if you want to synchronize devices using a MIDI clock.

It's useful if you want a sequencer to perform quantization.

It's useful if you want a sequencer to apply grooves.

It's useful if you want an adjustable amount of swing.

It's useful for complex arpeggiator patterns.

 

Aren't all these points mostly relevant as far as "bar"s are concerned? It seems to me that, within a bar, as long as there are enough ticks (usually as a multiple of 2 and 3) for us to slice time into a grid that accommodates the RELATIVE positioning/duration of notes, the 5 things you mentioned can be accomplished with ease.

[MathOfInsects]

Just play the song.

[AROIOS]

...2/4 is the same as 4/8, correct? Yet with 2/4 we often "feel" two differently stressed beats (oom-pah) suggesting a march feel. (Left foot right foot) ...Although I have been known to sequence it in 6/8 to see the subdivisions and available polyrhythms more clearly

 

Yup, we are on the same page here.

 

As you mentioned, 2/4 sounds like a "marching" rhythm because it matches soldiers' strides at 100 BPM. But nothing stops us from sequencing for it as a 4/8 or 8/16 to capture the 8th and 16th strokes of the snare drum in the band. (Or we can turn the piano roll grid resolution up to view the sub-division within quarter note beats in 2/4) So in these cases, as long as the relative positions among the notes/strokes are captured, and as long as the bars are correctly defined, what 2-based and 3-based slicing happens inside the bar can be flexible based on our needs.

 

...When it comes to micro-rhythms, even a sequencer grid has difficulty.

 

I saw David's video a while ago and wondered if those micro-rhythmic "push and pulls" are a reflection of the physical limitations of human anatomy and the percussive instruments' design, rather than the musicians' actual intent.

 

Thanks for sharing the video from Aimee, it's interesting how we intuitively clap on the back beats to Swing music. And that Harry Connick Jr. trick to "correct" the audience clapping is simply brilliant.

[AROIOS]

There is time signature and how you feel the beat. Talking with my old guitar teacher who played with Richard Bona for awhile. There was a tune she was never sure how to feel so she asked Richard if to feel it in 3 or 4. Richard said it doesn't matter that he will change how he feels the songs on different nights.

 

 

Notation can never say how to Swing or Groove you have to feel it, so your ears and gut always have the final say.

 

Your story about Richard Bona drove the idea home. Humans first FELT rhythm, and then developed a language to describe and record it. It just seems to me that this particular language currently used universally isn't so good at teaching music or driving out ambiguity.

[AROIOS]

Count me among the lost.

 

OP, out of curiosity, as part of your musical practice, do you play with other musicians?

 

I'm a one man band most of the time. And on the rare occasion I collaborate with other musicians, it was never through score sharing.

[AROIOS]

On the Audiobus forum and other electronic music oriented forums, there's always somebody looking for a sequencer that will let them compose in an odd time signature like 11/8, or put together a song that changes from 7/4 to 6/8. There are also peeps looking for a sequencer that supports polyrythms and/or Euclidean rhythm.

 

So yeah, time signature is very relevant to these people

 

Don't most sequencer already support odd (non 2 or 3 divisible) beats? I've used Cakewalk/Sonar for decades and it handles 5, 7 , 11s just like any other beats. Sub-division based on non-2-or-3-multiples is a whole another story, I've never seen a sequencer offering non-2-or-3-multiple based piano roll grids. But as long as you do the math manually and quantize by ticks rather than 2 or 3 based notes, quantization can still be done.

[AROIOS]

Don"t kill a groove just because you have the tools.

 

Point taken.

 

And thanks for the video, I got a kick out of the surgery Bob did on Eddie's solo.

[GovernorSilver]

On the Audiobus forum and other electronic music oriented forums, there's always somebody looking for a sequencer that will let them compose in an odd time signature like 11/8, or put together a song that changes from 7/4 to 6/8. There are also peeps looking for a sequencer that supports polyrythms and/or Euclidean rhythm.

 

So yeah, time signature is very relevant to these people

 

Don't most sequencer already support odd (non 2 or 3 divisible) beats? I've used Cakewalk/Sonar for decades and it handles 5, 7 , 11s just like any other beats.

 

I haven't seen consistent support for that in hardware sequencers - especially for polyrhythmic/polymetric music, other than the old trick of recording only in real-time (no quantization). I'm sure computer DAWs are ahead in this area, though Ableton Live is the only one I'm using at the moment - I switched from Logic years ago.

[Konnector]

Time signature is always important for reasons already stated above by others. You can choose to ignore it if for example you're working within a DAW and your click is at least on 8th notes or finer. That can get confusing if you have your time signatures change through the course of a song - especially if you incorporate odd time signatures. (Which I do a lot.) You'll end up off the grid so to speak, but it can still work for adding swing, etc. later if you understand how the notes will shift in any given region based on where you start that particular region. Sometimes I'll add all the timing changes so the grid is correct, but other times I don't bother and just work around it.

[AROIOS]

Time signature is always important for reasons already stated above by others. You can choose to ignore it if for example you're working within a DAW and your click is at least on 8th notes or finer. That can get confusing if you have your time signatures change through the course of a song - especially if you incorporate odd time signatures. (Which I do a lot.) You'll end up off the grid so to speak, but it can still work for adding swing, etc. later if you understand how the notes will shift in any given region based on where you start that particular region. Sometimes I'll add all the timing changes so the grid is correct, but other times I don't bother and just work around it.

 

You're right, I realized that time signatures are necessary. It's really "getting the time signature right" that I thought I could have cared less about. That's why I changed the title of my post earlier.

[AROIOS]

...

In fact, I think the reason Western notation stopped at the resolution of 32nd notes is only because that's the density of notes that still makes sense to our human hearing. Nothing prevents 1/64th notes and 1/128th notes from making sense to the ears of other species.

...

 

A small but important correction, 1/64 notes actually make perfect sense to human hearing in a musical context. I was studying a TRAP beat last night and realized this genre makes generous use of 1/64 notes. In my experimentation, 1/128th notes are still distinguishable but resemble sound effects more than musical beats.

 

And a related note to the topic in discussion: on vintage drum machines (e.g. TR-808) that had only 16 step grids, HipHop producers had to program their 1/32-note-based beats by laying down the groove on 2 bars, and then double the tempo. So they were doing effectively the same trick Tusker and I talked about. In other words, the "difference" between a 4/4 time signature at 70BPM and 4/8 at 140BPM was trivial to non-existence as far as they were concerned.

[Werno]

It's too late for me to research if this is actually true, but the OP's (revised) question reminds me of a vaguely remembered story about the early performances of Stravinsky's Rite of Spring. Time signature changes abounded, to an unprecedented extent for orchestras back in the day, and to get through it scores were prepared written in 4/4 with accents on notes to show the downbeats. I look forward to waking up tomorrow and checking if this is true.

 

I definitely recall a Steve LaFuria (sp?) Keyboard column back in the day discussing nested tuplets as used in the music of Frank Zappa, which would give the OP plenty to think about, but possibly have no impact on their musical life.

 

In terms of MIDI sequencers that could handle such stacked rhythmic complexity, I used to use Jeremy Sagan's 'Beyond', later Metro, which I recall being able to nest tupets of whatever value to whatever level, not that I did. It's one of those things like microtunings that don't come up in the keyboard realm as often as they used to.