Whats the difference between 6/8 and 3/4?

[machinesmith]

Exactly what it says on the tin! I have tons of questions however my brain and its thoughts dont run fast (no, they fly too low! HAH! Boom boom!)

So with millions of fleeting thoughts (which includes aforementioned questions) I decided to make a place where I could ask as many as I could remember, so that I progress from making horribly panned lullaby's to something more profound, and hopefully another newbie can benefit from the stuff here

(yes in spirit its like that Oldskool Klassroom thread I started which bombed horribly, but I'm still working on bringing it back - hey you can't dampen my Joe Dirt/Poppy like enthusiam...yet!) Onwards:

Isn't 6/8 and 3/4 basically the same thing with difference is speed? (I've had so many confusing answers with this one)

[LPChip]

6/8 and 3/4 are the same. Mathematically speaking, you can derade (is that the right word?) 6/8 to 3/4 by deviding both by 2.

People often call it 6/8 over 3/4 because they have 6 measures in 8 beats, not 3 in 4, as they have a part consistent out of 8 beats.

[Sam_Zen]

A bit of a clouding introduction, but in the end, a good question. !!
I've always looked at in a mathematical way, so there's obviously no difference between 6/8 and 3/4.
As LP states, the only reason may be, if 8 or 4 will be used as an entity, with a certain number of elements within.
A kind of resolution.

In western music the confusing thing is the classical notation. The characters for the notes.
As a default, sixteen 'quarter' notes is enough to make a bar. So it could be 32 flagged notes for one bar.
Correct me guys, if I'm wrong; so a full bar with 12 quarter notes in it means 3/4.. ?

I don't think this thing has anything to do with speed, it's just division of elements.

This is why I prefer to work with the Indian tala system.
The bar is then seen as a 'cycle', divided into a certain number of clock-steps. So the main 'beat' is the cycle.

So the concept 'beat' is doubtful as well here. Does it mean the finest clock-pulse, or a group of a number of them ?

[machinesmith]

Okay! I'm in the clear with that one then!
@Sam - Good on ya for detecting the classical music confusion (thats where my question stemmed from!) Also surprising revelation with you following the Indian Tala system (kinda embarrassing for me too  :oops: ) Anyone willing to answer Zen's questions(s)?

Okay Next one (software related)
Is there a way to convert my .IT files composition to a text file (an IT2TXT or MPTM2TXT, something that retains the same tracker look)?

Why? I wanted to show my tunes composition to my softwarephobic little sisters; they, of course, were against installing anything that didn't start with `Twit-' or ended with `-book')

[residentgrey]

with 6/8 the second set of '3/4' has a lower emphasis IIRC

[bvanoudtshoorn]

Um, sorry, but I have to disagree with just about everyone. 6-8 is NOT the same as 3-4 at all. It's all about pulse.

In 3-4, each bar is divided into three 'pulses', each a crotchet (quarter note) in length. In 6-8, each bar is divided into TWO 'pulses', each three quavers (eighth notes) in length. In other words, where 3-4 goes DUM ba Da ba Da ba, 6-8 goes DUM ba ba Da ba ba. (If it helps, 4-4 goes Dum ba Da ba Da ba Da ba). Yes, I know, all this Dum ba Da-ing is a bit silly. Also, you might have to give them a few goes out loud.

To answer your second question, in OpenMPT, copy and paste the pattern data into a text editor.

[LPChip]

Select all in a pattern, then copy.

Now open Notepad, and paste. Tadaa...

Btw, I do prefer if you make new topics for each question to keep things more organised.

[Sam_Zen]

Right, LP.

2 Barry : Sorry mate, I can understand you trying to defend the western system, but if you read your argumentation..
Maybe you have got classical lessons about this, but to me this is a bit too much DUM bla bla..
Well, you mentioned it : "a bit silly" . What's the defintion of a 'pulse' in this ?

To me this is about the notation of a time signature.
So I'm searching for the most efficient one, because the western notation is not sufficient, regarding the electronic possibilities.
It had to solve problems in an artificial way, by putting a curve on top of three quarter notes to make the playing a bit shorter in time.

The hit 'Take Five' by Dave Brubeck was said to be in 5/4. Now things are getting more unlogical..

with 6/8 the second set of '3/4' has a lower emphasis

Clear. Two phrases of three, but the first phrase has an extra emphasis on the first step.
In tala cycles, this step would simply be called the 'One' (instead of the 'Dum').
I chose for this concept because it's much more efficient in electronic circumstances.

I once made "No Fever" having a cycle of 37 clock-steps. What for a notation in a western classical way ?
In tala-style it's possible. A cycle of 11 can mean counting 3 times 3 plus 2, according to the accents.
The divisions of the 'sub-Ones' one could say.

[bvanoudtshoorn]

2 Barry : Sorry mate, I can understand you trying to defend the western system, but if you read your argumentation..
Maybe you have got classical lessons about this, but to me this is a bit too much DUM bla bla..

But you see, S_Z, the whole notion of a time signature IS a Western musical construct. And whilst yes, there are many other valid ways of expressing musical ideas, I think that machinesmith is probably most interested in the Western one, given that he asked the difference between 6-8 and 3-4. I'm not trying to say that anything's 'better' or 'more correct', just that I think that the Western notions of time signature are more relevant in the present circumstances.

3-4 is a 'Simple' time signature: it is grouped in blocks of two. 6-8 is a 'Compound' time signature: it is grouped in blocks of three. To try and make things simpler, here's an extract from Wikipedia:

Compound time signatures
3/4: A simple signature, comprising three quarter notes. It has a basic feel of:
       one two three
Each quarter note might comprise two eighth-notes (quavers) giving a total of six such notes, but it still retains that three-in-a-bar "feel":
       one and two and three and
6/8: Theoretically, this can be thought of as the same as the six-quaver form of 3/4 above with the only difference being that the eighth note is selected as the one-beat unit. But whereas the six quavers in 3/4 had been in three groups of two, 6/8 is practically understood to mean that they are in two groups of three, with a two-in-a-bar feel:
       one and uh two and uh

What's the defintion of a 'pulse' in this ?

A 'pulse' is where one would normally put the emphasis when counting out a bar. In other words, 4-4 normally has a 'pulse' on each beat of the bar (some of which are stronger than others). 3-4 has three 'pulses' (on each crotchet), and 6-8 generally has two 'pulses' (on each dotted crotchet), as outlined in the Wikipedia article above.

Now you say that this is all about notation -- I disagree with you. Yes, 6-8 and 3-4 are notated slightly differently, but I think you'll agree that there's a musical difference between, say, Kiss from a rose by Seal, which is in 6-8, and The Blue Danube (Strauss), which is in 3-4.

[uncloned]

I gotta weigh in with Barry on this one.

Don't get hung up on the representation - the music came first not the notation and with imagination there are lots of ways to represent the same thing on paper.

The difference in 3/4 and 6/8 is the accents of the pulse like Barry said - that is the intention of the representation. the 4 or the 8 represents the basic unit of the pulse - convention determines the common interpretation of the accents.

You could take... 12/8 and have the pulses of 6/8 by using accents. Or 3/4 even. It is all arbitrary.

Norm has been talking to me about TUBS box representation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_unit_box_system

But in this representation one adds accents explicitly (or at least Norm does).

[Sam_Zen]

Hm, I must admit that I lack some knowledge here.
And sure, it's about the music, not the ways of notation.

[machinesmith]

@ the gurus:
I'll go one up on Sam and say I lack a Lot of knowledge here! To me it Is about the music so when a tune pops into head...make a mad dash for tracker/pen and paper/office pin and blood to `write' it down. To me this was all a way to write your masterpiece down however - I had moments  where I was doing the opposite!

Using my compo entry as a guinea pig, apart from the main hook(s) everthing else had to be improvised (in that I'd actually composed 64...uh...pulse(?) patterns but I had to rearrange and/or re-compose some of the instrument parts to fit the rest of the song - is this expected? Is it inhernet to the tracker interface maybe? (edit: The Compo entry has  47 pulses per pattern (is pulse the right word? I normally called them `ticks') )

Also could my particular song be represented in 3/4? (i.e. is it simple enough to justify dividing by 2 like Sam and LP originally implied?) - *please don't unwillingly force yourself to re-hear my tune, its just a question!

Apart from their initial statements aren't Sam and Barry implying the same thing? (i.e What Sam is calling a `phrase' is what Barry's wiki excerpt is referring to as a `group') of course I could be just picking on semantics here but I just want to be clear...

@LP - In your first post I think the word you're looking for was `derate'. Regarding this thread as a repository - I concede defeat! I thought by keeping all my rants in one place I'd be keeping the forums clutterfree e.g. a quick glance at the forum and you'll see Louigi Veronas name frequently, I understand the guy has a lot to talk about, but everything just seems strewn all over the place!  And no I have nothing against him (he made a software that says `Android had does'...how cool izzat!?)

My second fear was getting the RTFM treatment AND cluttering the forums by asking a question that may have been (indirectly/directly)answered somewhere else. While I'm ok being yelled at for asking a direct question to which a direct answer has been given...its the indirect archetype I was trying to avoid.

Crap-ly I didn't conisder the barrage of info back and forth for each question (we're still discussing the 1st whilst the 2nd is a done deal!) So seperate threads it is I guess. Could you rename this thread to the question I orignally had?

And in closing - who the heck is Norm??

[psishock]

Could you rename this thread to the question I orignally had?

You can do this your own too, just edit your first post.

[Sam_Zen]

Right on, Psi.

2 machinesmith : Of course a topic like this will have a fluctuation of focus. So I get back to you initial question :

Isn't 6/8 and 3/4 basically the same thing with difference is speed?

I would say it's different in length, not in speed.

[Harbinger]

Sorry i hafta weigh in on this, even tho i'm late to the party, being somewhat studied in classical composition and conducting...

6/8 and 3/4 is a WORLD of difference in classical music, altho it may not appear so to the untrained eye. What bvan is said is all correct but there are two other considerations in composition. 6/8 is generally for music that sounds quicker even if the tempo is moderate; alot of classical and traditional Spanish music falls into this category. 3/4 is for more steady music, the Blue Danube being an excellent example.

I would substitute bvan's "pulse" for "accent," as each of these time signatures has there own meter, much like poetry.

As for the original intent, which is figuring out which meter to use when starting a composition, unless you KNOW you're working with 3 accents a measure, then use 6/8, as it has a lot more flexibility. And if you set it properly in the Song Properties, it will highlight your Pattern Editor columns in a better way.