And why don’t we fix it already?
Because a 3/4 time signature means “three fourth notes”.
Also, music notation is arbitrary and doesn’t matter.
Also, music notation is arbitrary and doesn’t matter.
Exactly what I was shouting into the void when taking music history/theory at uni and struggling.
“Why is it this way? None of this makes sense!”
“Some dudes 400 years ago started it this way and we’ve only slightly changed it since”
Because when you’re writing something for a large ensemble and you need them to play the right notes and rhythms there needs to be a standard way to notate music. Otherwise you waste time teaching individual parts.
And it does mostly make sense. It’s just that there’s room for interpretation.
I watched a documentary a while ago that explored the history of music notation. It’s something that evolved, it wasn’t meticulously planned out. And it turns out the notation we use today is very good to being able to read music quickly (compared to other historical methods).
The term “quarter note” or “fourth note” applies to the note because there are four of them in a whole note. In other words, the names of the notes apply to their subdivisions respective to each other, not the time signature.
You refer to 4/4 as the default?
Yeah. OP should be asking why a whole note only fits 1 bar of 4/4 (or 2/2, 1/1, 8/8, 16/16, etc).
I had the idea that a way to solve this would be to create a symbol that means, “play this note for the entire duration of the measure, regardless of meter.” As far as I know such a symbol doesn’t exist in standard notation.
It’s because it wouldnt help for sight reading the way you might think. Especially where there’s multiple voices like in complex piano parts. For example if you want one note to for 8 eighth notes in 4/4, but some to go for 10. Now we have to choose to use current notation or the new fangled “whole measure” or even “rest of measure” notation, and if using new fangled, we still use old notation for edge cases.
It’s hard to fight the status quo.
I would need an audio example.
You’re getting down voted because your comment is confusing music with musical notation. You can’t hear whether someone is playing a whole note or a quarter note. You can keep rhythm and say that note was 4 times longer than the last one. 1/4 notes will always be 1/4 the length of a whole note in the same song (assuming no time signature or tempo changes), but they don’t define a certain length of note in real time.
Downvoted? Who would care about that bs?
It is an indicator that you’re heading in the right direction or not on topic for your question. You don’t have to have an emotional response to data for it to relevant. You seem to be the kind to wallow in ignorance though since you ignored everything except the first thing I said.
I don’t know what you’re proposing exactly that you think would “fix” it, but you might be surprised at how many attempts to reform music notation have come and gone over the years. Perhaps the one you’re looking for has already been invented.
I know I can do my own research here, but I’d be keen to hear some keywords from you I can search about these different notations.
I dunno, I’ve just seen a few weird ones over the years. My search didn’t turn up any better place to start than the wikipedia page on musical notation which does cover quite a few of them.
This is an excellent video essay on the subject. Really goes into detail on why this is practically an unsolvable problem
“Fixing” notation is kinda like “fixing” English language. Besides, quarter notes make sense in the context of the rest of the system.
Quarter notes should be called “beat notes” or something, since they’re equal to one beat in the measure.
not in 6/8 or 2/2 - both are useful. You can not reduce fractions as time signatures are not fractions even thouth they appear that way.
In the UK they’re called crotchets, but I’m not sure that’s any less confusing.
