Guess that Time Signature

T

Tinseltopia

New member
Okay, so I was making a beat earlier today with some recorded sounds, and the samples just fit better with a different time signature to the 4-4 I'm usually comfortable with.

So I've got a short audio sample, but I have no idea what Time Signature it is. It's 128bpm and I would love to know as researching time signatures by myself, really wasn't helpful.

For example, they say: "How many beats per bar, Count the offbeats" to determine Time Signatures - But I just end up with it being 4-4 even though it isn't because there are 6 beats per bar

https://clyp.it/zfheaui3

The beat is by no means 'Good'. I'm just experimenting with something outside of my comfort zone
 
That clip is definitely 4/4 - I'm not sure why you think it isn't.

What are you counting as the 6 beats? Is it the piano?
 
Last edited:
This is why I'm confused, as it is 128, but doesn't follow the typical 4 beats per bar.

Time Signature pic.jpg

I realise, I'm really showing how much of a newbie I am right now :)
 
Milo Burke said:
I tapped it out. Looks like the music (not your session) is around 85 bpm. Perhaps 85.3?
Click to expand...

That makes perfect sense! 85.3 is exactly 2/3 of 128 - So the track is; in a sense 'TwoThirds' time. (Hence the 6 beats per pattern)

Oh well, I thought I was breaking into new ground and being original, but it turns out I was doing exactly the same as I've always done, albeit, a very confusing method

Thanks for the help!
 
I thought the track had a cool groove to it. Perhaps playing against the metronome inspired a more interesting percussion arrangement than you would have found traditionally? I call that a win, not a failure.
 
I think I know vaguely what's going on here- there's a rhythm I think of as 'fake triplets'.

In a bar of 8 eighth notes, if you put a note on the first, fourth and seventh of the eighth notes ( beat rest rest beat rest rest beat rest) it sounds a little like triplets.

Lots of people play this rhythm by mistake when they mean to play triplets because it's easier than proper triplets.

The way to tell the difference when listening is for fake triplets, the first two beats are longer and the third is shorter, wheras true triplets divide the bar/ note exactly into three equal pieces.

I will come back later and post some examples of tunes that are three beats to the bar so you can get a better sense of what it feels like.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, don't know how I missed this thread initially, but hopefully to clear things up a little: a) the rhythm in question is _definitely_ in 4/4 time, b) there is no real relationship between tempo (how fast or slow the music/rhythm is) and time signature/meter (how it is counted and how many beats per measure); you can have a fast, slow, or medium tempo 4/4, as you can have a fast/slow or medium tempo 3/4, 6/8, 7/8, 7/4, or any other "odd time" rhythm pattern.
And finally, c) there is no such thing as "60/2.8" time or "two thirds time" meter; theoretically (but not in practice), the top number can be anything, but the bottom number would be a 2, 4, 8, or 16 (divisible by two), as these correspond to existing note values such as half-note, quarter-note, eighth-note, or sixteenth-note. Some people try to get around this by making the "bottom number" something like a dotted quarter-note, but that's kind of artificial, as notation and meter theory weren't designed that way, so you're dealing with a lot of mathematical gymnastics, so to speak...

GJ
 
Sure, if you say so,, but the OP interpreted that to mean the meter was in "two thirds time" ("of course! It makes perfect sense!")...

GJ
 
You're not familiar with Eisenstein's theory of Special Relativity, are you??

Nope, my bad, I meant this: >>>>That makes perfect sense! 85.3 is exactly 2/3 of 128- So the track is; in a sense 'TwoThirds' time. (Hence the 6 beats per pattern)<<<< Not your math problem; somebody else's. Anyway-- The Beat is in 4/4!!!!

GJ
 
Yeah I am actually typing from the future but if you read this later it will be the past and don't worry I could see how easy it was to have made such an honest mistake.
 
OK, mind blown:

1f00f3bd9749a7b6c3392fc763a4df9b_400x400.jpeg


GJ
 
Milo Burke said:
I thought the track had a cool groove to it. Perhaps playing against the metronome inspired a more interesting percussion arrangement than you would have found traditionally? I call that a win, not a failure.
Click to expand...

German drummer by the name of Benny Greb actually instructs his drum students to practice "against" the metronome. It IS a great technique! Using the clicks between your downbeats forces you to take control of the groove, rather than sit back and passively play behind the metronome.
 
hollandturbine said:
Yeah I am actually typing from the future but if you read this later it will be the past and don't worry I could see how easy it was to have made such an honest mistake.
Click to expand...

Who knew we'd still get back to the future jokes in 2016? Haha good shit man. Well I'm gonna hop back in my Delorian and rewind the future to write this post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top