Metronomic indications

Think of the same place in the measure; the 'before' is what happened before, the 'after' is what will happen.

Therefore in your case, dotted half note = half note

so passing from a ternary division to a binary one, keeping the pulse constant, you will find that the eighth note that follows will be longer than the one that was there before

thnx. sometimes I have also happened to find the opposite, hence the doubt.

I confirm what was indicated by Valchiria.

DrJellyfish wrote:

thnx. sometimes I have happened to find the opposite, hence the doubt.

Some indications may seem "contrary" but they respect the composer's intent; for example, if you were in 4/4 and moving to 4/8, you might find quarter=eighth or vice versa.

Which one is correct? Both, in the sense that it depends on what the composer wants to achieve...

Yes, exactly; the doubt concerned the fact of writing a single indication.

... but in my example there is uniqueness, if:

moving from 4/4 to 4/8 you find written quarter=eighth, this means that the composer intends only a change of notation and not the tempo/pulse speed

moving from 4/4 to 4/8 you find written eighth=quarter, this means that the composer intends to also change the tempo/pulse speed

Therefore there is no doubt and no ambiguity... based on what you write, the performer executes

...maybe it can help, in the past I opened a dedicated topic on tempo, meter and rhythm, we didn't touch this subject, but knowing well what is meant by the terminology might perhaps help to provide clarity...

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/1895-tempo-ritmo-e-metro/?hl=metro

Example.

At the beginning of page 2, what does the metronome refer to?

And this 6/4 is counted in (3) half notes?

DrJellyfish wrote:

Example.

At the beginning of page 2, what does the metronome refer to?

For this, it practically says that an eighth note is equal to a quarter note from 10 onwards. And it's a bit contradictory since it then says how much the quarter note is worth... it probably means to tell the performer that, aside from precise indications, the ratio is eighth note to quarter note.

You might say: but we are coming from a 5/8... which is practically a 3/8+2/4 (if a quarter is truly equal to an eighth) ... so at 10... it's self-explanatory

DrJellyfish wrote:

And this 6/4 is counted in (3) half notes?

He says that the half note beat from measure 103 is = to the preceding half note. Practically the same pulse, but a different internal subdivision.

Valchiria wrote:

Think of the same place in the measure, the 'before the =' is what happened before, the 'after the =' is what will happen.

So in your case, dotted half note = half note

so passing from a ternary division to a binary one, keeping the pulse constant, you will have that the eighth note that arrives after will be longer than the one that was there before

It is exactly the opposite: 'before the =' refers to the current indication, 'after the =' ... the reference value, a number or an "equation"

Gerardo wrote:

... but in my example there is uniqueness, if:

moving from 4/4 to 4/8 you find written quarter=eighth, this means that the composer intends only a change of notation and not the pulse speed

moving from 4/4 to 4/8 you find written eighth=quarter, this means that the composer intends to also change the pulse speed

Therefore there is no doubt and no ambiguity... based on what you write, the performer executes

True in your example since we are in 2 binary beats, DrJellyFish's second example is unmistakable. There is no escaping it if one moves from binary to ternary and vice versa.

Gerardo wrote:

I confirm what was indicated by Valchiria.

If you reread her writing and see the practical examples, you will soon change your mind

Zazzà is right, following the initial example, when you indicate a new tempo write quarter note=something...then you can have the following cases:

quarter note=112

or else

quarter note=dotted quarter note (which obviously refers to what precedes it)

Oops Zazzà, you're right... I described it backwards

I apologize again to Drjellyfish... of course, with examples it goes much faster

it is precisely for this reason that I was asking for your opinion, in fact it is a system that can generate some doubts. thanks to everyone for the comments.

It's a type of indication that I often use in my pieces; on one hand, the logic is to facilitate reading for the performer by avoiding too much "black" [ink/notation] in case of rhythmic intensification, and on the other hand, to maintain a constant pulse despite tempo changes... this clearly reaches the performer less directly, as they must also study the rhythmic structure