Tieing Notes Into The Next Bar

Hello LPH-community,

I created Logic score quantized and forced legato MIDI notes. Some of the notes are tied into the next bar. That is, the MIDI note ends in the next bar and is "forced legato-ed" to the next MIDI note. For whatever reaso in the notation score editor, there's a rest displayed right after the bar line where a tied MIDI note is supposed to be. This happens in several bars. I don't know if that has to do with the selected quantization value, that I am using or what else it can be.

If I have the supposed to be tied MIDI note overlapping the following note, it displays the tied note correctly.

quantized legato MIDI notes

There shouldn't be at the beginning of bar 32

The first note of bar 32 is not on the first downbeat...

Be aware that quantizations interact with one another, besides other region/track parameters.

Hi Atlas,

Thanks for your reply. The first not of bar 32 is supposed to be a tied not from the previous bar.

Sorry, my mistake... I had misunderstood your intention.

Have you tried changing the syncopation/interpretation setting(s)?

Here are your solutions:

1) Turn off the Interpretation checkbox. That will solve the problem. But it might end up adversely affecting the appearance of other notes in the part. So your other choice is to be a bit more surgical about it:

2) With the Interpretation checkbox enabled, individually defeat interpretation on those notes which should tie over into the next measure, but don't. Look under the Functions > Note Attributes menu, or, use the corresponding key commands to be able to individually defeat (and if need be, force) interpretation on individual notes.

In this screenshot, I've used method #2. As you can see, the Interpretation checkbox is enabled, but by defeating the interpretation on the tied-over note, the display looks as you want it to.

Thank you Atlas and ski! Indeed it I had to use defeat interpretation and syncopation on that particular note. It now looks how it supposed to be.

Perhaps, you know this too. I have another similar question. Let's say I have a half note triplet that starts on bar 4 of a 4/4 beat and ends in the new bar. Using the n-tuplet tool doesn't work if the tuplet ends in the new bar. It says: The tuplet exceeds the bar measure.

Do you know of a workaround?

Thanks!

You're welcome!

BTW, you shouldn't need to use syncopation at all to achieve proper notation for that part.

As to your other question, if I read your description correctly, a half note triplet -- if started on a downbeat -- would normally fill one entire bar. But it wouldn't be notated as a triplet extending over into the next bar if, what you're talking about, is something like what you see in the screenshot below.

Hi Ski,

It's not a problem when the tuplet starts and ends within the same bar, but if the ending of the tuplet exceeds the bar end.

Referring to your example, the tuplet would start on the note e.

I'm able to get all of these variations with little/no trouble. The length of the two tied notes had to be extended a bit past their absolute length, but sometimes (just sometimes) that's what's needed to get things looking right. I've also used two "user rests" to get this looking this way. But again, sometimes that kind of thing is necessary.

1) In your example you are always starting the tuplet on the beginning of a bar and something tieing it. That's different than starting a tuplet on a later beat and ending the tuplet in the new bar. I attach a sketch.

2) Another notation style, I would also very much appreciate where syncopation is used, but the bar middle is respected. See in attached ex. 2.

I have to say, I've never seen notation as in your first example. To me, that notation doesn't make sense. The full quarter + half rest in the second measure suggest that the duration of the downbeat note is a full quarter. To achieve the notation for that, I'd do a triplet at the end of the first measure, with the first beat being a rest. Then you'd get the triplet timing for those two notes, and the penultimate note is played on the downbeat.

If you really wanted the penultimate note to be held for exactly a triplet in duration, I'd notate that as a triplet on the downbeat, with two rests to fill in the triplet.

To achieve the notation in your second example, you'd turn syncopation on and then insert a "user rest" (an 8th rest will work) on beat 3.

Thanks Ski for digging into that!

Ex.1, the quarter isn't a full quarter otherwise it wouldn't be any longer a 3:2 tuplet. The intention behind this kind of notation is to create a quick and easy readable score when (african) polyrhythmic is played. So, the musician switches to the other time feel.

Ex. 2, this works well. Thanks for showing it!

Thanks Ski

For other readers, about "user rests" (read below):

http://documentation.apple.com/en/logicexpress/usermanual/index.html#chapter=31%26section=9%26tasks=true

Creating and Inserting Rests in the Score Editor

In certain situations, you may want to insert rests manually. These manually inserted rests (also called user rests) can be used if you don’t like the way a particular automatic rest is displayed; for example, to avoid dotted rests, or for the syncopated display of rests, even when Syncopation is turned off. (See Syncopation.)

In rhythmic display terms, user rests behave like notes, with enabled Syncopation and disabled Interpretation parameters. (See Interpretation.) User rest interpretation is affected by the display quantize setting just as notes are. (See Quantize.)

Other properties of user rests are as follows:

They replace automatic rests, but unlike automatic rests, are listed as events in the Event List. These events have a MIDI channel and a velocity value. The velocity value determines their vertical position in the staff. (Normal middle position is achieved with velocity value 64.)

They can be moved vertically. Automatic rests cannot be moved.

They can be resized with the Resize tool. Automatic rests cannot be resized.

Mikko, thanks for explaining what that's all about, and with that you jogged my memory... I recall seeing such notation in only one place, and this was some time ago... it was in a book of transcriptions of African rhythms. Now I'm going to have to rummage through my stuff and find it again.

I'll see if there isn't a way to get Logic to notate that, and if so I'll post back here.

Cheers,

sKi

Thanks! 8)

I'll be perfectly honest with you. I sooooooo cheated to make this happen. Here are the steps. Brace yourself (no pun intended):

1) create two notes on beat 4

2) make one of those notes "independent" (Functions > Note Attributes > Independent) and using the layout tool, move it to the right

3) put another note on the downbeat of the next measure. Now you have three notes for your very fake triplet

4) insert the sideways "L" graphic into the score and align it to form the left bracket (use the layout tool)

5) insert another one and bend its shape so that it forms the right bracket (again, use the layout tool)

6) insert the text "3" and give it the "tuplet" text style from the parameter box

7) tweak the results some more with the layout tool until even you're fooled as to how legitimate it looks [ahem]

8 ) ask yourself, "was it worth it?" LOL!

Thank you Atlas and ski! Indeed it I had to use defeat interpretation and syncopation on that particular note. It now looks how it supposed to be.

Perhaps, you know this too. I have another similar question. Let's say I have a half note triplet that starts on bar 4 of a 4/4 beat and ends in the new bar. Using the n-tuplet tool doesn't work if the tuplet ends in the new bar. It says: The tuplet exceeds the bar measure.

Do you know of a workaround?

Thanks!

That's written as a 1/4 + 1/8 triplet starting on beat 4 tied to an 1/8 + 1/4 triplet on beat 1 of the next bar.

There is no such thing as a triplet of three 1/4 notes that starts on beat 4 of a 4/4 bar.

That is a logical impossibility if you think about it.

The first half of the second 1/4 would be on one side of the barline and the other half would be on the other side of the barline.

You can use non-standard notation like that if you want but musicians who know how to read music won't understand what you want.

I found the book... "African Rhythm" by A.M. Jones (1954). The author transcribed many quite complex rhythmic patterns which fall over bar lines (see example below) but none of them indicate triplet notation written in this way. And indeed if I saw that kind of notation on a chart, I'd question it.

I found the book... "African Rhythm" by A.M. Jones (1954). The author transcribed many quite complex rhythmic patterns which fall over bar lines (see example below) but none of them indicate triplet notation written in this way. And indeed if I saw that kind of notation on a chart, I'd question it.

Beaming over barlines is a fairly common way to indicate phrasing that crosses the barline.

But your example had none of that.

Tuplet figures over barlines are another matter though.

There may be exotic cases where even this makes sense but I can't think of any.

Beaming over barlines is a fairly common way to indicate phrasing that crosses the barline.

Of course. Fairly common indeed.

But your example had none of that.

I only took the time to scan and post that to provide an example of how rhythms can be notated in non-traditional ways using western notation, not to show triplets notated in the way we're discussing, per se.

Tuplet figures over barlines are another matter though. There may be exotic cases where even this makes sense but I can't think of any.

I can't think of any either. As I said, if I saw that on the page I'd question it.

OK. Here's an over-the-barline tuplet that does make sense.

And here's the only way to notate the original 1/4 triplet starting on beat 4 idea that makes sense, even though it's "wrong" as far as I know.

There's probably a way for Logic to do this sort of thing, graphically, using the Layout Tool to move an Independent Note so it sits in the middle of the barline along with a few other tweaks.

But it won't sound right over MIDI.

Ex. 1 makes sense

Ex. 2 looks more like an illustration for the front of a musician-oriented get well card LOL!

As for sounding right over MIDI, that's not really an issue. It's quite common -- often quite necessary -- to create "score only" parts that don't play over MIDI but otherwise reflect the MIDI part that's part of the actual recording or mockup.

I found the book... "African Rhythm" by A.M. Jones (1954). The author transcribed many quite complex rhythmic patterns which fall over bar lines (see example below) but none of them indicate triplet notation written in this way. And indeed if I saw that kind of notation on a chart, I'd question it.

Aaah! Come on!

No sweat, it's a beer dance!

Hey Ski, joegold and Atlas007 just now i see your last posts since it dropped to the second page of this thread and I didn't see that.

Thanks for digging into that!

Thanks Ski for your African Rhythm scan example!! I like the depicturing of the polyrhythmical score from the book example. I wished those over-barline-tuplets were doable via MIDI interpretation instead graphical only.

Thanks Joe for the pic examples!!

To do such a notation in logic like Joe mentioned would be also great to do it.

Joe wrote:

OK. Here's an over-the-barline tuplet that does make sense.

http://forum.makemusic.com/attach.aspx/24318/Quadruplets.jpg

You're welcome!

Regarding your example, I think if I placed that in front of a musician they'd throw something at me. Probably the instrument I asked them to play it on.

Ski, it's good that you give your feedback, allow me to comment on that. I am nut picker when it comes to layout and documenting things. There is usually a reason why I want to realize things a specific way.

Generally, musicians who get my scores, get it presented in a way that minimum time is needed to play it as time is money and usually there's no time to rehearse. And finally, there are different situations the one you are referring just go on stage and catch what you can get versus my purpose in this case which is an educational purposes, not music notation in general, but a rhythmical exemplary that is meant to help showing some aspects between different time feels and time notation.