Last edited by Glamator; 03-25-2007 at 03:13 PM. Reason: unavailable link, link is not underlined
Glamator, that is certainly a piece in 5. It is fun to explore different times, isn't it. Nice shot at an alternative time signature.
Thank you for your help. I don't know what is wrong with my link and is unavailable. Path is correct but one word is always not underlined.Originally Posted by etLux
My initial idea was to make 10/8 circle (2x5/8). Second bar then comes with different accent but melody dictate choice of rhythm.
Thank you for listening.
It is interesting to play with rhythms.Various rhythms can give you new combinations and new approach. Thank you for post.Originally Posted by jaynkate01
I like this piece, and I find myself being jerked around by the rhythm. I kept wanting to count it in 6 rather than 5. I think it's because most of the 5/4 (8) stuff I've heard and played has been phrased as two beats followed by three beats - kind of 1-2-3-4-5. I guess Brubek's Take Five would be the most famous.
Yours is three beats followed by two beats, setting up the feeling that it's going to be two phrases of three (at least to me) but the second phrase is only two beats. Very interesting and different IMHO. Or maybe I haven't listened to enough stuff in 5.
it still sounds strange..... counting up to five. But since Desmond and Brubeck (I was told that Desmond composed that famous piece!!) one get used to other rhythm patterns. It certainly is well done..... Congratulations.
Choice is 3+2 or 2+3. Initial idea was to make two bars circle.Then in second bar accents are reversed.I think game is in accents. Thank you for comment.Originally Posted by juan
Hi,Originally Posted by Raymond62
You are right it sounds strange. It is interesting exploring various rhythms and differnt combinations.There are not many 5/8 songs. Maybe is one reason because best song was written. Thank you for comment.
Hummmm... I have always heard/felt Take Five as 3+2.Originally Posted by juan
// Ars longa, vita brevis