MY COMPLAINT!

[ccrobinson]

I've read a number of interesting comments here about singing too fast and too slow. I am curious what standard you all apply to determine whether a song is too fast or too slow? Personal preference? Time signature? Do your books/sheet music/etc. have a this=that for tempo? Are you talking about songs marked adagio being sung presto, or vice versa? Or what?

Time signature has little to do with tempo. I don't remember seeing a hymn marked for a particular tempo, or else I've seen it and never noticed it.

I don't know how to describe it very well, but you sort of "feel" how fast the song should be. Our music minister sets music before me nearly every week that I've never seen before and I can feel what the tempo should be once I start playing.

I don't know if that really helps answer the question or not, but there you go.

 

[av1611jim]

I am no musician by any stretch of the imagination but isn't the tempo marked in your hymnals with 2/4 or 3/4 or 6/8 and such like things?

If I am right then the song leader should be "conducting" according to how it is written.
A song leader who does not lead with his hands or arms is inviting disaster. At least that has been my experience. Whenever I have visited a church and their song leader does NOT lead with their hands according to those tempo marks, I usually find that I get lost in the song. They might be singing along, and everyone around me is singing any old way they want to and it sounds like a cacaphony. But when the leader knows what he is doing and leads appropriately, the whole congregation is in sync.

JMO

In HIS service;
Jim

 

[ccrobinson]

2/4, 3/4, 6/8, etc. are all time signatures. They have no bearing on tempo.

 

[av1611jim]

Then wouldn't the tempo be relational to the time each note is held? For example, if we are singing Victory In Jesus and we hold some notes longer than the note would indicate, (3/4, 1/4, 1/2 etc.) aren't we messing with the tempo?

In HIS serevice;
Jim

 

[ccrobinson]

Originally posted by av1611jim:
Then wouldn't the tempo be relational to the time each note is held?

Tempo and time signature are not related. 4/4 time doesn't necessarily mean that a song is fast. "Victory in Jesus" is fast, but "God is so Good" isn't, and they are both 4/4.

[/QB] For example, if we are singing Victory In Jesus and we hold some notes longer than the note would indicate, (3/4, 1/4, 1/2 etc.) aren't we messing with the tempo?

In HIS serevice;
Jim [/QB]

Not technically. Notes that are held longer than their indicated value are designated by the use of fermatas. I don't think "VIJ" has any fermatas, but a fast song like "He Lives" has them at the end of the refrain. Fermatas don't change the tempo of "He Lives" from fast to slow; they're used to emphasize the point of the song. If a fermata changed the tempo of "He Lives", the next verse of the song would be the same slow tempo as the end of the refrain is, but it isn't. The next verse picks right back up with the fast tempo.

Hope this helps!

 

[av1611jim]

Only the first part.
The rest sounds like my greek class!

I guess "feel" is as good as any other explanation.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

[av1611jim]

OOO! OOO! OOO! mistuh Kottuh!

You mean like the change in a song from 3/4 to 4/4 in the chorus? I forget the song just now. I'll get back to you.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

[av1611jim]

Constantly Abiding!
That's the song!

In HIS service;
Jim

 

[rlvaughn]

Jim, I don't want to confuse you, but I do want to interject a few things.

It is generally understand and taught that the time signature refers to the rhythm and has nothing to do with the speed. So in a sense it is relative. A 3/4 time signature, for example, means there are three beats in a measure (reading top of the "fraction") and a quarter note gets one beat (reading bottom of the "fraction"). In contrast 3/8 time would mean there are three beats in a measure and the eighth note gets one beat. In 3/2 time there are three beats in a measure and the half note gets one beat. In 6/4 time there are six beats in a measure and the quarter note gets one beat.

But research of some old composers and teachers in 18th and 19th century America (at least) show they did intend that their time signatures also represent a particular amount of seconds per measure. I don't know if there are any examples online, but often rudiments of music in books such as the "Sacred Harp", "Southern Harmony", etc. would include a length of time for each measure of music - for example, maybe 4/4 as two-and-one-half seconds per measure.

Though I'm not sure whether anyone today teaches this second method (I was taught time signature basically has nothing to do with speed), this later makes some sense to me, and gives a standard or guideline in which notations of "fast", "slow", "adagio", "presto" become more than just someone's interpretation. In the modern way, with everything relative, there's no difference, for example, between 3/8 time and just singing 3/4 fast.

Just my thoughts. Hope it doesn't just add more confusion.

 

[Debby in Philly]

Well said. Glad you cleared that up.

Another way to think of time signature is organization. That the beats are arranged in twos, threes, fours, etc. How much time between beats, as you have said, is another matter entirely.

 

[av1611jim]

Thanks.
I like the quicker Victory in Jesus. The slower way seems like there isn't much Viiiiiiiiictooooooryyyyyy in Jesus.
VICTORY! in Jesus.

You did help me understand a bit more.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

[ccrobinson]

Though I'm not sure whether anyone today teaches this second method (I was taught time signature basically has nothing to do with speed), this later makes some sense to me, and gives a standard or guideline in which notations of "fast", "slow", "adagio", "presto" become more than just someone's interpretation. In the modern way, with everything relative, there's no difference, for example, between 3/8 time and just singing 3/4 fast.

You're equating time signature and tempo in your last sentence. They aren't related. There's nothing fast or slow about a time signature. The only difference between 3/8 time and 3/4 time is the type of note that gets the beat. BTW, there's really no reason to ever write a song in 3/8 time, because writing in 3/4 time accomplishes the same thing without causing confusion to the musician(s).

The metronome is the standard for determining how fast allegro or adagio is. Typically, most of us just go with how a song "feels" to determine whether we have the right tempo or not, but I'd bet good money that a song marked as allegro would match up with what a metronome says allegro should be.

BTW, if you couldn't tell, I love discussions of music theory.

 

[rlvaughn]

Originally posted by ccrobinson:
You're equating time signature and tempo in your last sentence.

Yes, to make the point. If time signature and tempo aren't related, there is no real difference between 3/8 time and 3/4 time. It's all relative.

Also the idea that "time relates to tempo" works easy for me, which is for singing and leading only. After studying the relation as presented in some of the mentioned 18th & 19th century rudiments, I like the "feel" quite well. I expect it would seem a little slow for most folks. I'll look them up and post them for your sometime, CC. You'd probably be interested to see the time in seconds per time signature.

There's nothing fast or slow about a time signature.

I realize that is standard theory today. My point in the previoius post is that that idea has not been absolutely consistent throughout the history of music theory. Some have taught that there is a relation between the time signature and the tempo of a song.

The only difference between 3/8 time and 3/4 time is the type of note that gets the beat. BTW, there's really no reason to ever write a song in 3/8 time, because writing in 3/4 time accomplishes the same thing without causing confusion to the musician(s).

I've hardly ever seen 3/8 time (We Three Kings is the only one that comes to mind), but I don't really see any reason it would be confusing to anyone who reads music. That said, I agree. If there is no relation between time signature and tempo, is there really any point in having more than one kind of triple time? 3/2, 3/4 and 3/8 can all be made to show the same relation of time between notes. For example, two sixteenth notes in 3/8 have the same relation to one eighth note as two eighth notes have to one quarter note in 3/4, and so on and so on.

[ April 22, 2005, 01:59 PM: Message edited by: rlvaughn ]

 

[ccrobinson]

Yes, to make the point. If time signature and tempo aren't related, there is no real difference between 3/8 time and 3/4 time. It's all relative.

Also the idea that "time relates to tempo" works easy for me, which is for singing and leading only. After studying the relation as presented in some of the mentioned 18th & 19th century rudiments, I like the "feel" quite well. I expect it would seem a little slow for most folks. I'll look them up and post them for your sometime, CC. You'd probably be interested to see the time in seconds per time signature.

Cool. I was surprised you wrote that, but thanks for clearing up my confusion.

Yeah, that would be very cool to see the 18th & 19th century stuff.

I've hardly ever seen 3/8 time (We Three Kings is the only one that comes to mind), but I don't really see any reason it would be confusing to anyone who reads music.

We Three Kings is 3/8? I didn't realize that. I do a lot of sight reading in my church, frequently playing stuff in morning service for special music that I see for the first time maybe 15 minutes before the service starts. I had intially thought that 3/8 would be somewhat confusing in that scenario, but if We Three Kings is in 3/8, and it's not confusing in the least, then, simply put, I was wrong about that.

 

[rlvaughn]

CC, I couldn't say whether "We Three Kings" is universally in 3/8 time, but it is in the book we use. I can't remember any other songs with that time signature, though I'm sure there are some.

I guess I'll have to look up some stuff from those old rudiments. I thought there might be something online, but haven't found it yet. Perhaps later on tonight I can copy some of it. First, we're going to a 4-H meeting.

 

[dianetavegia]

Well the Bible never said 3 Kings so that's a pet peeve of mine! Let's make it faster and ask some more kings.

 

[rlvaughn]

Diane, I think we need to learn to understand that there is a difference where it is a matter of interpretation - some people interpret some Old Testament verses that mention kings and gifts as prophecies of this Matthew 2 event - and times where there is a contradiction created - where people put the wise men at the manger when the Bible says house.

 

[rlvaughn]

CC, I pulled out some of the books I have to give some examples. I think you'll find this interesting.

I have a collection of a number of old tune books (mostly reprints) from the late 1700s to past mid 1800s. They range geographically to Maine in the northeast, Georgia in the south, and Ohio & Missouri in the midwest. All of them equate time and tempo, although every book does not give the exactly the same time in seconds. They are consistent for the most part.

Some of the terminology is a little hard to understand because of terms no longer in use today. And also from the late 1700 books to the mid 1800 books, you can see some evolution in terminology and symbolism. A "quaver" is what we call an "eighth note". A "crochet" is what we call a "quarter note". A "minim" is what we call a "half note". A "semibreve" is what we call a "whole note". OK, here goes.

Moods of Common Time. The first mood is known by a plain C and has a Semibreve, or its quantity, in a measure, sung in the time of four seconds, four beats in a bar, two down and two up.

The second mood is known by a C with a stroke thro it, has the same measure, sung in the time of three seconds...

The first mode of Triple time is known by a figure of 3 over 2, has three minims in a measure, sung to the time of three seconds...

The above quotes are from "Wyeth's Repository of Sacred Music, Part Second" (2nd ed. 1820), and the next are from "The Harmony of Maine" by Supply Belcher (1794). Belcher's book is if from back when the "s" looks like a "f" in print.

Adagio denotes a very slow movement: It has a semibreve for its measure note...This mood had four beats in a bar...Each beat should be exactly one second of time. [the illustration of "adagio" has the "C" symbol as in Wyeth's first mood above, rlv]

Largo, the second mood in common time, has likewise a semibreve for its measure note...performed in the same manner as Adagio, only one quarter quicker, or four beats in the time of three seconds. [the illustration of "largo" has a "C" with a "stroke thro it", the same as Wyeth's second mood, rlv]

The fourth common time mood, 2 fours, has a minim for its measure note...Four beats in this time, are performed as quick as three in Largo...

The Second compound mood, contains six quavers in a bar...A beat in this mood has the same time as the second in common time, called Largo. [this is our 6/8 time, rlv]

BTW, you might be interested in this. By the time White and King print their The Sacred Harp in 1844, they write:

The original first mood of common time [the 4 second one as above, rlv] and the third of triple [3/8 time, rlv] have been dispensed with, they being but little used in the present day.

 

[dianetavegia]

I understand that the wise men came after Mary and Joseph gave their offering of doves and that they were already in a house, meaning Jesus wasn't a newborn infant.

Psalms 72:10 The kings of Tarshish and of the isles Will bring presents; The kings of Sheba and Seba Will offer gifts.

Isaiah 60:3 The Gentiles shall come to your light, And kings to the brightness of your rising.


Sunday School teachers tell children there were 3 wise men because of 3 gifts. Scripture says Wise Men from the East who followed the star. We should change the song to We Wise Kings of Orient Are .

 

[rlvaughn]

Yes, or it could easily be We Wise Men of Orient Are, for those who don't like "kings". Personally, it doesn't bother me that much. It (3) could be correct, though I don't think so. But the other - putting them at the manger with the newborn infant - contradicts Scripture.