Gould Option 2 tuplets
How do I format tuplets according to Gould option 2? This is where you use the beaming that's closest to the number natural number of subdivisions what would fill the same time space. For example:
Option 1 - a quintuplet in the space of a dotted crotchet is displayed as 5 quavers.
Option 2 - the same quintuplet is displayed as 5 semiquavers.
The latter is visually more natural when the number of tuplet subdivisions is large and close in number to the equivalent non-tuplet subdivisions.
Richard
Comments
Option 1 is 5 in the space of 3, option 2 is 5 in the space of 6. Both are possible in MuseScore (the latter via a custom tuplet), but generally tuplets squeeze more notes into a duration, not less
In reply to Option 1 is 5 in the space… by Jojo-Schmitz
Thank-you that's just what I needed to know. And it's very easy to do.
In reply to Option 1 is 5 in the space… by Jojo-Schmitz
[updated/clarified]
in 6/8 if you want to play two notes in the space of three eighth notes, I think the most common way to notate that is with two eighth notes (with a "2" over), not with two quarter notes. And two eighth notes in the space of three means squeeze in less notes.
In reply to in 6/8 if you want to play… by AndreasKågedal
I don't dispute that. Equally the traditional way to show a quintuplet over a dotted crotchet in 6/8, 9/8 etc is to show 5 semiquavers. Similarly a 15-tuplet or 17-tuplet (see Janáček Mládí) over 4 crotchets as 15 or 17 semiquavers. However the more modern method would be to ensure the first number of the tuplet ratio is always greater than the second and base the tuplets on the second number. In the case of 5:3 one would show quavers and 15:16 one would treat as 15:8 and similarly show as quavers. My argument against the modern or option 1 method of Gould is that it's not as clear for the purposes of sight reading and approximating the rhythm at a glance. However I would never show 3:2 over a crotchet length as anything other than quavers because by convention that's what's expected.