Concerns with Traditional Rhythm Notation

1. There is a multiplicity of graphical representations for relative duration:

– stems or not

– solid or hollow noteheads

– flags (various numbers)

– beams (various numbers)

– dots (various numbers)

– ties

– super/sub-script digits with arcs for tuplets

– a whole set of different symbols for rests (duration of silence)

– same symbol used for whole note rest (4 counts) and entire measure rest (various durations).

Aside from the sheer multiplicity and inconsistency of graphical schemes,

this practice preempts too many graphical distinctives that could be used for other notational purposes.

For example, some pitch proposals use solid/hollow noteheads to distinguish whole-tone rows, which then requires an alternative notation to distinguish whole and half-notes from quarter notes, etc.

2. Rhythms are notated by duration instead of “beat” or “count”

This is a particular problem for notation software, since it makes note position dependent on cumulative durations,

making it difficult to do editing without global side-effects.  Perhaps as a consequence,

notation software often resorts to a Procrustean “tyranny of the bar”, making it difficult to edit passages that don’t begin and end at bar lines.

Musical “sense” and performance, however, is characterized by regular patters of beats (stress) similar to the “poetic feet” patterns of stress in spoken poetry.  Moreover, music students routinely learn “counting” pattern, such as 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 &, , and often amend their scores to include this essential information.

3. Notation of syncopation

In syncopated music, when notes are sustained across a beat, there is a convention of tying notes across the bar and even the half-bar.

This results in inconsistent notation for the same duration,

e.g. a quarter-note vs. two tied eighth-notes,

but it is perhaps a nod to the idea that “beat” takes precedence over duration.

4. Encoding of up-beats or “soft” feet is “backwards”.
In traditional notation, it is customary in to have notational rhythm units start on a beat. So, for example,  a dotted eighth note may be beamed to a subsequent sixteenth note, or a half-note may be followed by a quarter-note in the same measure, Often, in “compound meter” especially, the sustained note is perceived as the “end” of phrase or motif, and the following unstressed note is perceived as a  “pick-up” to the next phrase or motif, not as an extension of the previous one. But the visual connection between the two, via a beam or inclusion in the same measure, obscures the break.  This problem is exacerbated by the practice of breaking lines only at bars. This can result in the beginning notes of one phrase being “orphaned”  at end of a line ending one phrase, separated from the bulk of the phrase on the next line or even next page.

5. Music is “poetry”, but it is traditionally printed as “prose.”

This observation actually encompasses “form” as well as rhythm.

Music is traditionally printed in a way that minimizes the number of pages at the expense of formal clarity or even page-turniing convenience.  Furthermore, typically printed lines break only at bar lines, even though, as noted previously, musical phrases often end mid-bar.  This carries over into conventions for repeats and alternative endings, requiring duplication  of “beginnings” of initial passages after the “end” of final passages to notate a “repeat”, or repeat of “ends” of common material at the beginning of each alternative ending.
These practices are analogous to printing poetry as prose, newspaper style, vs. printing in “lines and stanzas” to expose the formal structure of the piece.