Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Beaming conventions? (Read 4178 times) previous topic - next topic

Beaming conventions?

This is more of a general composing question than anything else. I'll admit I've been doing a lot of composing/arranging even though my knowledge of theory is weak. I know just enough to be a danger to musicians everywhere. :)

My question is about beaming conventions. I've seen different groupings used in different works, and I'm wondering if there are any hard and fast rules. Noteworthy's automatic beam feature groups notes according to one beat. Two eigth notes get a beam, four sixteenths, etc.

Most of the music I've seen written is not grouped this way. I'll admit it makes some sense, and it's easier to read than some of the alternatives, but it also seems to waste space.

I've seen a lot of music where all the notes are connected with straight beams across the entire measure, and also quite a bit with long runs of 8th or 16th notes beamed in such a way that you have a beam slanting up for several notes, and then another down for several notes. The division points don't seem to have anything in particular to do with the quarter note (or whatever the bottom number of the time signature is) boundaries.

I've also seen situations where if the dominant note in a measure is the 8th then the entire measure gets written that way, such that any quarter notes are written as tied 8ths, etc. (same applies for 16ths or whatever) with the whole mess beamed.

As a performer, I find this harder to read than if the quarter notes were written as such, but I have used something like this in one of my scores.

There's a repeating bass line that goes quarter-eigth-quarter in three parts, and the remaining part is dotted_quarter-quarter. I wrote these as quarter notes tied to eigth notes because it looked better when viewing the entire score.

I'm wondering what the rules are for governing this sort of thing so my scores don't look amateurish.

I'd appreciate any general guidelines, links, book recommendations, whatever to steer me in the right direction. Thanks in advance!

Re: Beaming conventions?

Reply #1 –
As you've realised, there are conventions, but there are as many ways to break the rules as there are rules. The way I was taught is summarised below:

General rule: Beam groups of one beat (as NWC does by default). Exception: if the notes have the same value, you can beam them all together as long as you don't beam across the "imaginary bar line" -- i.e. the middle of the bar in 2/4, 4/4 and 6/8. In 3/4 you essentially don't have such an imaginary bar line, so you have to group per beat. An especial "no-no" is having notes that cross the imaginary bar line: in other words, in 2/4 you can't have a dotted quarter followed by an eighth, instead you "should" use a quarter and two eighths, with the quarter tied to the first eighth. The two eighths can be beamed together.

That being said, even way back in Mozart's time these rules were ignored if the result was an easier to read score. Nowadays it's very common to see syncopated rhythms written "as sounded" with dotted notes, etc. rather than the "respect the imaginary bar line" rule. Use your judgement.

Re: Beaming conventions?

Reply #2 –
I agree with Fred.
But respect the musicians that will play from your score.
It is much easier to sight read parts that are grouped on either side of the centre of the measure.

Re: Beaming conventions?

Reply #3 –
Fred wrote: in other words, in 2/4 you can't have a dotted quarter followed by an eighth, instead you "should" use a quarter and two eighths, with the quarter tied to the first eighth. The two eighths can be beamed together.

Wow. this leads to hard-to-read scores. IMHO of course: the less items there are, the quickest to be read. But this needs some (little) more knowledge in reading music.
Note that a quarter tied to 2 8ths is oftenly played as such, i.e. you hear the first attack, and then heard a simili-attack on the first eighth, which is to be avoided if you pretend to play music rather than notes. It is a typical novice mistake.

On the other hand, a double-dotted note is hard to read... Especially if it crosses the "imaginary bar line", which I'd consider as a fault. So what Fred says (quoted hereover) is true if the quarter is just before the "imaginary bar line".

Whatever the rules are, as they may change, the principle is to help the reader to understand the music. That's why, in beaming notes who have lyrics, one *shouldn't* beam 8ths (or 16ths,...) which have separate syllables.

But in instrumental scores, the "imaginary bar line" is most often the rule, as long as you don't mix different rhythms on different beats. Once more, your score must be easy to read --even from the first time. Writing syncopes as 4 8ths beamed 2 by 2 with a tie is not necessarily the most readable. But for not trained readers it may help to play it correctly... though the accent may not be played on the "contre-temps".

Writing music is as writing books. You don't write for anyone, but for a part of them.

HTH,
   Dominique

Re: Beaming conventions?

Reply #4 –
marsu said one shouldn't beam 8ths or 16ths in vocal music
on separate syllables.

I know that this is common practice for many publishers, but I disagree, and a recent survey on CHORALNET on this
question showed (IIRC) a majority in favor of beaming
syllables. I think it makes the score easier to read,
just as it does for instrumentalists; and syllables are
already shown by the presence or absence of slur marks.

The unbeamed appearance looks old-fashioned to me; more
contemporary scores seem to be opting for beaming.

- seb
 

Re: Beaming conventions?

Reply #5 –
Yes, I think that is right. When (sight-)reading music the first thing is to get the timing right, and that means (IMHO) beaming the quavers etc.

It's a moot point whether pitch or word placement comes next, but for precision in reading pitch a beam is a lot less fussy and distracting than a series of individual tails.

The words themselves are fairly obviously positioned on the relevant notes whichever system you use.