Time and Rhythm (a)

Time and Rhythm (a)
A Musical Typology


Rhythm and time (tempo) are often confused for one another. Although these two are interrelated and intertwined, they are in themselves two very distinct subjects. There is a typological play between these two.

In brief, typology is a term that uses past events, pre-understandings or an analogy already understood to explain or reveal a truth or to define a corresponding of events.

For example, in the words of St. Augustine, Typology assumes that the New Testament is concealed in the Old, and the Old is revealed in the New.

How do we apply typology as we understand it, to time and rhythm? Let me try my best to explain.

Without time, rhythm can not exist. However, when we create rhythm, time would be automatically established. Time gives rhythm its notational value and in rhythm, time is felt and is given a whole new meaning.

Let me give you another practical example. Try singing your favorite hymn and sing it in such a manner where every note is equal in value. What did you notice? How did you feel? When every note is sung in equal value, then there is no rhythm. When there is no rhythm, then you can never ascertain if it was duple or triple time.

Therefore, this demonstrates how Time and Rhythm are both unique and yet are closely intertwined and can not stand alone.

Time is a type and rhythm an antitype.

Type is normally a sign or a prefiguring sign which points to the antitype, which is the thing signified.

For example, we use duple time or triple time (type) to express rhythmic motive or express certain styles of music effectively.

Another way of looking at it is this: Triple time (type) is used when composing a polonaise or mazurka, without which, they can never come to fruition. The rhythm (antitype) of the polonaise and mazurka can only be crafted when written in Triple time (type).

Time is everything for music. It is the canvas on which music is composed. Time is the boundary in which musical freedom is found. For the musician, time is the canvas and frame where musical colours are painted. Without time, music can not exist. Even free time does not mean that there is no time – it is just that the time is freer.



Time

In English, we have one word for many meanings. For instance, the word “ball” can mean a sphere object, a fun time, or a room for dancing. The word “time” in music is no exception to this phenomenon and is broadly used. Here are some examples:

• It is in triple time (denoting that there are 3 beats in a bar)
• Play in time (telling someone to play with a steady beat)
• Fast and slow time (Play the music in a fast or slow pace)
• First and second time (We refer to the repeat of a section, second time)
• Strict time (Steady pace)
• Free time (Allowed for a manipulation of pace without keeping to a steady pace)
• Simple and compound time (the reference to the different groupings of beats)

Because of this, confusion and improper usage of the word TIME arose and lead to deeper confusion. This situation is not helpful especially for the aspiring catholic musician. As such, I hope that this essay will help provide some answers pertaining to time and rhythm.

In our mortal existence, we live in a dimension called time. Time in music draws upon this dimension, however, musical-time is a result from our manipulation of this dimension.

Try clapping your hands with perfectly equal intervals;

1       2       3       4       5       6       7       8       9       10 etc …. Well done!
 l.......l l.......l l......l l.......l l.......l


l…….l = represents the interval between two claps. If all the intervals are
equal then you have a consistent time (or beats).



If you clap like this instead:

1      2   3    4        5     6   7    8       9     10 then it could mean that:
 I.....I I..I I...I I…….I


• You were not clapping in time, or not clapping in strict time, and thus giving the effect that it was clapped in fast and slow time (various tempo or speeds)
• You were not clapping steadily
• And I would certainly ask you to clap the second or third time or as many times as it takes to get you clapping consistently



Now, do the same thing again while accenting on every two claps. Take care to clap them with perfectly spaced intervals.

>       >        >       >       >
1  2 I 3  4 I 5  6 I 7  8 I 9  10   etc…Excellent!
1  2   1  2   1  2   1  2   1  2    = the accent should fall on the first beat


> = denotes that the first beats are accented


You have just created a two beat per bar time. In other words; Duple time.


Accent every three claps,


>          >         >          >
1 2 3 I 4 5 6 I 7 8 9 I 10 etc…Excellent!

….and you would have created three beats per bar; Triple time.

Contrary to popular belief, music has only two types of beats. No, they are not compound and simple time because then, there is also irregular time. The two types of beats are:

• Duple
• Triple

Quadruple is actually the addition of 2 duple beats.

2 + 2 = 4

The only difference is that in quadruple time, the main accent falls on the first beat of every bar with the addition of a smaller accent on the third beat.

>    _       >    _      >     _
1 2 3 4 I 1 2 3 4 I 1 2 3 4


> = denotes that the first beats are accented
_ = denotes a mild emphasis

All other beats are the combination and addition of the two main beats – duple and triple. (this is true even for compound time)

For example:

Irregular time of 5 and 7 beats per bar is made up of:

3 + 2 = 5

3 + 3 + 2 = 7

However, it is not always that when you sing or play music, these accents are executed.

Rhythm

What is rhythm?

It is defined by the spaces formed between notes according to a steady tempo/beat. The variety of spaces between notes depends on the value of each note. The value of each note depends on how long it last after it has been sounded until the next note is executed. This variation of time spaces between a succession of notes is what we call rhythm.

Now that time and rhythm has been defined, I will give you an example of how these two topics are frequently mixed up.

First of all, fast beats are termed as fast tempo and slow beats, slow tempo. Therefore, if the piece of music is played fast, it is a fast tempo piece and NOT fast rhythm and similarly, if the music is played slowly, it is a slow tempo piece and NOT slow rhythm.

There were many instances when I have heard musicians telling another “No, the rhythm is slower” in efforts to inform his fellow choir member to play at a slower tempo. Rhythm can never be fast or slow.

Well, I do not know if your parish or diocese faces such confusing situations but where I come from, this happens all the time.

Parallel to this understanding, the opposite applies. When a rhythm of a certain part of the music is demonstrated, try to avoid the tendency to say, “The TEMPO is like this” but rather say, “This is how the rhythm is” and then proceed to demonstrate by clapping out the rhythm or by using any method which works best.

When the same music is played twice using two contrasting tempo – the first time fast, and the second time slow, It is the tempo that changes and not the rhythm. The rhythm does not change just because the music is played faster or slower than previously, unless of course the rhythm was deliberately changed.

Similarly, a person can not change his genetic constitution just by being fat or thin. He is still that same person; either a fatter same person OR a thinner same person. Alter his genetic makeup and he would be an entirely different person – but I guess we do not possess the power to do such a thing.

H2O is still H2O whether in the quality of ice, aqueous OR steam.

This is a “mirror image” of the miracle of the transubstantiation; a miracle where GOD changes the substance without changing the external qualities. Let us take a minute to ponder: If humans can change the external qualities (known as accidents) without changing substance of objects, do you not think that God who is almighty can change the substance without altering the accidents?

Back to music: another point of note is that, music which is highly rhythmical is NOT suitable for use in the liturgy. This is because highly rhythmic music does not support the solemn nature of the mass. It fails to communicate a sense of sacred and a mood for prayer in the liturgy and instead it has the tendency to invoke excitement or emotions which are not appropriate for liturgy. As such, modern sacred music composers should deny any such complexities in their compositions.

* do not mistake the excitement of joyful anticipation of advent to the excitement of highly rhythmic music.

*note that the Gregorian chants and sacred polyphonic compositions are mainly written in moderate to slow tempo (tempo moderato) and they were never written in highly complex rhythms.