4 Against 3

Put it however you want, my reasoning was not what you inferred... reread the question and then you'll see that the first instinctive response should have been: are you sure?

What I understood about the misunderstanding is what was written before you got offended ... it seemed correct to me to point it out, if you are sure that I shouldn't have pointed out the inconsistency of the question ... ok.

Tantamount that Lestofante went into a crisis... so it's not like I'm dreaming anything up

Natan wrote:

It's so much that Lestofante went into a crisis... so it's not like I'm dreaming anything up

I replied to Marziano. If Lestofante went into a crisis, I'm sorry: Marziano asked how to resolve the 4 on 3 and I answered that. If he got confused, I repeat, it doesn't change the answer. The 4 on 3 is always resolved in the same way. We can go on as long as you want or, if you prefer, I can tell you that you are right and we'll end it there.

PS for the record: you are the one who took offense, for me it would take something more...

What crisis, what crisis, come on...!

If you need an intuitive idea of how it works, try helping yourselves with this song by The Doors, where there is a famous 3 over 4 break, if you listen to the drummer's bass drum (the first one goes from 0:36 to 0:38). The bass drum is important, so I recommend turning up the volume well (or the bass, in short, being able to hear it clearly). In short, this is the effect.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6M_0nU7RdPU

Open content (youtube)

I simply read the topic title and the last posts, from which I inferred that it seemed important for Marziano this year; ... immediately after, I posted the first example that came my way...

Regarding the "4 against 3" (aside from the alternative meanings of that phrase...), I remember that even during my piano studies as a boy, I encountered similar combinations in a famous C major sonata by Haydn (so there are even ancient examples...). In fact, since the same sonata also contains small groups that can be resolved into quintuplets, one also finds the "5 against 3" combination.

How is the difficulty resolved? By eye, I would say that speed helps: it seems much more difficult to me to divide a measure into four with the right hand and three with the left in a moderate tempo. In some cases, even in a moderate tempo, it isn't extremely difficult; in fact, for example, it happens to play a voice in duplets and a voice in triplets simultaneously with the same hand. But here one only needs to think of the tempo divided into six, in the sense of 2+2+2, i.e., a triplet in which each eighth note is itself subdivided into two sixteenth notes; the second note of the duplet coincides with the sixteenth note in which the second "2" is subdivided.

Personally, I think there are much more complicated examples: you know "Carnaval", in which Schumann has fun, in a 2/4 tempo, dividing the entire measure into 7 eighth notes? Another example that comes to mind is Chopin's waltz in C# minor (op. 64 no. 2), where while the left hand beats the usual 3/4 time, the right hand divides the measure into 8 eighth notes: now that is complicated to do with precision!

Finally, a small clarification on notation, in reference to one of the previous messages. I don't know if it is a "fixed" rule, but let's say that generally speaking, a criterion for writing irregular groups should be this: if, for example, the tempo has simple subdivision (say 2/4), the units of time are quarter notes, and if it is necessary to divide the unit of time into three, three eighth notes with a "3" are used; if the same piece is written in the corresponding compound time, dots are added to the quarter notes (and to the half notes), and the "3"s are removed, but the figures remain the same. Similarly, in a piece in 6/8, a dotted quarter note (unit of time) irregularly subdivided into 4 instead of 6 should result in 4 sixteenth notes (obviously with a "4" to indicate the irregular group); so if the same piece is written in 2/4, the dots are removed from the quarter notes, the "4"s are removed, but the 4 sixteenth notes do not change. This is in general terms, and of course, we know there are exceptions: the most common case is that of 4 eighth notes (instead of 4 sixteenth notes) that irregularly subdivide a dotted quarter note in a compound time.

Ciao

Gino

Thanks Gino, the path of embellishment is very interesting

gpr wrote:

Regarding the "4 against 3" (aside from the alternative meanings of such a phrase...), I remember that even during my piano studies as a boy, I encountered similar combinations in a famous sonata in C major by Haydn (therefore, there are also ancient examples...).

... then I must get it

gpr wrote:

How do you solve the difficulty? By eye, I'd say that speed helps

Oh sure, the faster the better: but problems arise if you find yourself in a slow tempo...

Marzapane wrote:

(...)

... then I must get it

I'll tell you where to find it; it is sonata no. 48. Look here: http://javanese.imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/1/1f/IMSLP113690-PMLP01715-Haydn-Piano_Sonate_No48-XVI35-Kohler.pdf

Marzapane wrote:

the path of embellishment is interesting

However, the small groups are not measured; it's not exactly a case of "pure" 4 against 3 clearly written by the composer

4 against 3 can also be found in Chopin's famous Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2 in slow tempo. I believe that contrasting rhythms should be studied and understood at a very slow speed. One must start from the slow, or as Carlos likes, from the rallentando, and then arrive at a sustained speed. In some cases speed helps, in other cases speed is an additional difficulty. In this case, it really seems to me that it helps... To make it messy...

TheSimon wrote:

o as Carlos likes, in slow motion

Yes, but I was talking about "slow motion" regarding the movements during the study phase...

Regarding the 4 against 3, see also Muzio Clementi, Sonata op.25 in G major, circa 1797, beginning of the modulating bridge ( http://imslp.org/wik...fromIndex/06205 ), just as regarding the 3 against 2 there is the Sonata in D major op.26 no.3

In short, this combination has been used since the old days

Thank you for the new ideas and reports

In Fantasie Impromptu, I see sixteenth note quadruplets in the right hand and eighth note triplets (or sextuplets in other editions) in the left hand. Which one should I follow? Does it change anything? Then I see 7 eighth notes in the right hand against always 6 (or 3) in the left: how to do it?

( Marziano )

I, for example, studied Schubert's famous Serenade in D minor for violin and piano, and I found 3 vs 2 several times

Thanks to some citations in other contexts on the forum, I obtained Luigi Rossi's book on Theory... chapter IV is exactly what you need. In short, it involves decomposing overlapping rhythmic figures into the one common to both and singing/solfegging/playing while respecting the correct note entries.

If you need it, I can post some examples... maybe post yours, so we can build the decomposition together

Thanks, and thank goodness I had already bought it!

Here we are! http://imslp.eu/linkhandler.php?path=/imglnks/euimg/3/34/IMSLP11074-Godowsky_APS_22_Chopin_Fantaisie_Impromptu.pdf

But do you think listening to these passages helps in performing them well later on?