Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Triplets and invisible notes (Read 4457 times) previous topic - next topic

Triplets and invisible notes

It seems to me that these are not correct in Print Preview:
Code: [Select · Download]
!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.0,Single)
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=First|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:1
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=End|Pos:2|Visibility:Never
|Bar
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=First|Pos:0|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:1
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=End|Pos:2
|Bar
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=First|Pos:0|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:1
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=End|Pos:2|Visibility:Never
|Bar
|Note|Dur:8th,Triplet=First|Pos:0|Opts:Stem=Down,Beam=First
|Note|Dur:8th,Triplet|Pos:1|Opts:Stem=Down,Beam
|Note|Dur:8th,Triplet=End|Pos:2|Opts:Stem=Down,Beam=End|Visibility:Never
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End
The bracket should start at the left of the first visible note and end at the right of the last visible note. The "3" should be centered in what is visible. When there is only one note, either some minimum amount of bracket should be displayed even if this causes a small overflow of the note boundary.

An argument could me made that triplets should be like slurs, i.e., invisible if the first note is invisible. I won't make it as I see no particular use for it.
Registered user since 1996

Re: Triplets and invisible notes

Reply #1 –
NWC doesn't recognize the width of invisible objects, so far as I know.  I think that's why we have invisible noteheads and zero stem lengths.

See if this meets your needs:

!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.0,Single)
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=First|Pos:0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:1|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=End|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Bar|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=First|Pos:0z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:1|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=End|Pos:2|Visibility:Always
|Bar|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=First|Pos:0z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:1|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=End|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Bar|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:8th,Triplet=First|Pos:0|Opts:Stem=Down,Beam=First|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:8th,Triplet|Pos:1|Opts:Stem=Down,Beam|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:8th,Triplet=End|Pos:2z|Opts:Stem=Down,StemLength=0,Beam=End|Visibility:Always
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End

Or for the last measure,
!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.0,Single)
|Note|Dur:8th,Triplet=First|Pos:0|Opts:Stem=Down,Beam=First|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:8th,Triplet|Pos:1|Opts:Stem=Down,Beam=End|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:8th,Triplet=End|Pos:2z|Opts:Stem=Down,StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End

If you want to really extend a bracket, just pad it a bit:

!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.0,Single)
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=First|Pos:0z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:1|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
|Note|Dur:64th,Triplet=End|Pos:2z|Opts:StemLength=0|Visibility:Always
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End

But enough of my fooling around.    When would you use the triplets as you wrote them?  I'm not sure I undertand the theory, and maybe the program doesn't, either.

Re: Triplets and invisible notes

Reply #2 –
David,

Looking at the print preview for your examples, I do not believe any of them cure the point Rick is making (or at least the point I think he is making).

The triplet marking with the line still is shown covering the items that are not seen .  So in the print preview you see the line over the place of the invisible note.

If you don't want to see the note - why would you want to see the line ?

There should be some way of being able to control the line and make it invisible if you want.
Rich.

Re: Triplets and invisible notes

Reply #3 –
Quote from: Richard Woodroffe –
If you don't want to see the note - why would you want to see the line ?
More specificlly: if the note/rest takes up no space, shouldn't the bracket reflect that?
Surely, it cannot be correct for a bracket enclosing notes within a bar to cross a bar line.

I'm just beta testing here. It appears to me that the method used does not account for invisble notes/rests. Perhaps a different method would be superior.
Registered user since 1996

Re: Triplets and invisible notes

Reply #4 –
Rick wrote
Quote
I'm just beta testing here.
 

Whew!  I thought I was missing the theory.   I don't think the program should be able to handle the examples because I think they're musically wrong.  Two notes should never (*) be tripletized, because unless they're dotted, they can't divide by three.

(*) I should never say never - someone is bound to prove me wrong. 

Richard wrote:
Quote
If you don't want to see the note - why would you want to see the line ?
You need to show the extended bracket if you're doing a workaround for some odd rhythmic figure. 

I think we discussed this a few months ago when trying to figure out how to make a triplet within a triplet, something I discovered in Ellington's manuscript score for his A Tone Parallel to Harlem.

Here's an illustration:

Top layered staff

!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.0,Single)
|Note|Dur:Half,Triplet=First|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:Half,Triplet|Pos:0z|Opts:Stem=Up,StemLength=0
|Note|Dur:Half,Triplet=End|Pos:0
|Bar
|Note|Dur:Half,Triplet=First|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:Half,Triplet|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:0z|Opts:Stem=Up,StemLength=0
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=End|Pos:0z|Opts:Stem=Up,StemLength=0
|Bar
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End

Bottom layered staff

!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.0,Single)
|Rest|Dur:4th|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=First|Pos:0|Opts:Stem=Up
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:0|Opts:Stem=Up
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=End|Pos:0|Opts:Stem=Up
|Rest|Dur:4th|Visibility:Never
|Bar
|Rest|Dur:4th|Visibility:Never
|Rest|Dur:4th|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=First|Pos:3|Opts:Stem=Up
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:3|Opts:Stem=Up
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=End|Pos:3|Opts:Stem=Up
|Bar
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End

This wasn't the figure Ellington wrote, but I think it illustrates the point well enough for this discussion.

Re: Triplets and invisible notes

Reply #5 –
Quote from: David Palmquist –
Two notes should never (*) be tripletized, because unless they're dotted, they can't divide by three.
(*) I should never say never - someone is bound to prove me wrong. 
Consider it done.
Code: [Select · Download]
!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.0,Single)
|Note|Dur:Half,Triplet=First|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=End|Pos:0
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End

Here's some theory: I want to put 4 Quarters in the place of 3:
Code: [Select · Download]
!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.0,Single)
|RestChord|Dur:8th,Dotted|Opts:Stem=Down,VertOffset=-15|Dur2:4th|Pos2:-1
|RestChord|Dur:8th,Dotted|Opts:Stem=Down,VertOffset=-15|Dur2:4th|Pos2:-1
|RestChord|Dur:8th,Dotted|Opts:Stem=Down,VertOffset=-15|Dur2:4th|Pos2:-1
|RestChord|Dur:8th,Dotted|Opts:Stem=Down,VertOffset=-15|Dur2:4th|Pos2:-1
|Bar
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=First|Pos:-1
|Rest|Dur:32nd,Triplet|Opts:VertOffset=-2|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:-1
|Rest|Dur:32nd,Triplet|Opts:VertOffset=-2|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:-1
|Rest|Dur:32nd,Triplet|Opts:VertOffset=-2|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:-1
|Rest|Dur:32nd,Triplet=End|Opts:VertOffset=-2|Visibility:Never
|Bar
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=First|Pos:-1
|Rest|Dur:32nd,Triplet|Opts:VertOffset=-2|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:-1
|Rest|Dur:32nd,Triplet|Opts:VertOffset=-2|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:-1
|Rest|Dur:32nd,Triplet|Opts:VertOffset=-2|Visibility:Never
|Rest|Dur:32nd,Triplet|Opts:VertOffset=-2|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=End|Pos:-1
|Bar
|Note|Dur:8th,Dotted|Pos:-1|Opts:Stem=Up,Beam=First
|Note|Dur:8th,Dotted|Pos:-1|Opts:Stem=Up,Beam
|Note|Dur:8th,Dotted|Pos:-1|Opts:Stem=Up,Beam
|Note|Dur:8th,Dotted|Pos:-1|Opts:Stem=Up,Beam=End
|Bar
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet=First|Pos:-1^
|Note|Dur:32nd,Triplet|Pos:-1z|Opts:Stem=Down|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:-1^
|Note|Dur:32nd,Triplet|Pos:-1z|Opts:Stem=Down|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:-1^
|Note|Dur:32nd,Triplet|Pos:-1z|Opts:Stem=Down|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th,Triplet|Pos:-1^
|Note|Dur:32nd,Triplet=End|Pos:-1z|Opts:Stem=Down|Visibility:Never
|Bar
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End
measure 1 gets them to start at the right place, but they sound too long and I don't have a bracket.
measure 2 gets the bracket, notes sound too short, bracket is too long.
measure 3 gets the appearance right, but is musically incorrect and may not align properly with another staff.
measure 4 goes to a hidden playback staff. (sounds just fine)
I'm looking forward to the day when I can hide the ties and use measure 5.

I'll save how to replace the "3" for another day.
Registered user since 1996
 

Re: Triplets and invisible notes

Reply #6 –
Quote
Consider it done.
Yeah, yeah, yeah (with the appropriate friendly,chiding tone).  I should have said two notes of equal value.  But at least I knew I needed the disclaimer. 

I think layers and hidden elements might be the way to get what you're after, but I suspect there would be a great deal of trial and errir, and it might not work.

Quote
I want to put 4 Quarters in the place of 3:
That's not really a triplet, is it?  It's what we've been calling an n-tuplet, and we know NWC does not yet support n-tuplets (although, ahem, it's been on the wish list for a long, long time...)

I'm going to go to bed.