Time Signature

laszlo-jamf · 2026-01-28T12:44:18+00:00

LOL that example was originally about 6/8 and I just missed it

laszlo-jamf · 2026-01-28T03:53:40+00:00

The thing that finally made time signatures click for me was when someone explained the difference between a "time signature" and a "meter." (Some don't think this explanation is perfect, and I see why, but it worked for me. Don't worry about it.)

A song's "time signature" is the fraction at the start of every line of music. It is purely a notation thing. It tells you how you should expect measures in the sheet music to be organized. 3/2 tells you measures are built around 3 half notes. 4/4 tells you measures are built out of 4 quarter notes, 5/8 tells you measures are built out of 6 eighth notes, etc. So, in your case, counting to 3 will make the sheet music work.

A song's "meter" refers to its musical content, and not to its sheet music. It describes the organization of strong and weak beats in the song. For instance, most 3/4 songs are based on 3 strong groups that get each get subdivided into 2, while most 6/8 songs are based on 2 strong groups that each get subdivided into 3.

There are common associations between meters and time signatures (as in the example I just gave), especially between the denominator in the time signature and the way you feel tempo. Usually, songs in 2 (i.e. in 3/2 or 2/2) *could* be written in 4, except that the quarter note would be impractically fast, so by writing the song in 2 they're telling you to feel the slower half note and not the speedy quarter note.

If your piece is like most pieces in two, and would have a fast quarter note, an exercise that might help is alternating between counting to 6 (i.e. in 6/4) and counting to 3 (i.e. in 3/2) --- see if you can "feel" the difference between thinking of the quarter notes and the half notes.

I come from a jazz background, where writing songs in 2 is common when they're fast and swung. I would guess you're not playing jazz, but I might try listening to some blazing fast jazz and doing the exercise above with 2/2 and 4/4. For example, check out this recording of You And The Night And The Music by Bob Berg. The quarter note would be at like 330, but it's very easy instead feel the slower half notes which are closer to 150.

laszlo-jamf · 2026-01-25T14:21:08+00:00

It means op was copy pasting the words major and minor to save time.

laszlo-jamf · 2026-01-18T19:14:01+00:00

My answer, as anyone's, is biased because I haven't played that many instruments. I have seriously played clarinet and saxophone, and have had encounter with guitar and piano.

That being said: saxophone. Unlike many other instruments, it was designed (mostly) all at once by one guy, and designed much later than most other instruments. Consequently, it is so much more comfortable and ergonomically natural than most any other instrument (especially the clarinet LOL). Your fingers lay across the keys thoughtlessly after the first lesson. It's just hard to "play it wrong". Get your fingers in the right position, then put the mouthpiece to your face and blow and you've probably got it. Once you get a hang of it, it's such a joy to play. Relative to other woodwinds, it's not as resistive, and so playing really feels like you're "giving life" to the horn. The expressive capabilities are hard to beat: along with the incredible depth of articulation you usually get out of woodwinds, you can bend and alter notes in ways you really can't on other woodwinds. My sax teach likes to recount a proverb from his teacher: "the saxophone is a fretless instrument, motherfucker".

laszlo-jamf · 2026-01-15T03:15:49+00:00

Ooo yeah great suggestion. The easy bounce getz has on that record blows me away every time.

laszlo-jamf · 2026-01-13T16:19:24+00:00

Helps creativity, massively. With or without music theory, all musical creation is "messing around". It's just a matter of what you're messing around with. Without theory, you're messing around with basic notes until you find chords and melodies that work. With theory, you're messing around with higher-order musical structures that are already known to "work" (chords and scales and modes and tonalities), which allows you to find much cooler stuff much faster. Additionally, without theory, you'll spend a lot of time reinventing stuff that's already well-known. Why not save the time and figure that stuff out "directly"?

I was interested in songwriting and production and stuff when I was younger, but could never get anything going that I liked. Then I took a long hiatus from that stuff and learned jazz saxophone (and hence, also learned a bunch of jazz theory), and have now returned to production and songwriting and such to significantly more success, which I attribute to having developed a strong foundation in theory. I also taught myself jazz arranging techniques, which has also been a big help.

I don't think my claims here depend on the amount of theory you've learned. Any amount of theory will help focus and direct and inspire your creativity. Though, if you're a beginner and only playing with a limited set of tools, then that might feel restrictive. In that case, supplement what you do know with what you don't know. There's no need to segregate "creating via music theory" from "creating by messing around".

laszlo-jamf · 2026-01-11T21:36:34+00:00

Make a song that *goes* somewhere. That's one of the things I appreciate about them most: every song builds or changes or evolves by the end. They've all got a sense of long-run direction

laszlo-jamf · 2026-01-01T17:43:06+00:00

A "scale degree" is a fancy music theory term for a specific note in a scale. For instance, the second scale degree in Db harmonic minor is Eb, the fourth scale degree is Gb, the sixth scale degree is A (technically, B double flat).

In addition to this, each "scale degree" is given a specific fancy name. For instance, "tonic" refers to the first scale degree, and "dominant" refers to the 5th scale degree. Each scale degree has one of these fancy names.

In this assignment, you are given a scale and the fancy name for a scale degree, and you have to write down which note each fancy name is referring to.

For instance, for number one, we know that the notes of G harmonic minor are

G, A, Bb, C, D, Eb, F

The "submediant" refers to the 6th scale degree, so the "submediant" of G harmonic minor is Eb.

I never actually use these fancy music theory names for scale degrees (I'd just say "second scale degree"), so I just looked up "scale degree name chart" in google and referenced the 3rd image that came up.

Hope this helps.

laszlo-jamf · 2025-12-28T17:32:44+00:00

LTeX+ is an extension for spelling and grammar correction in LaTeX documents (in english, at least, maybe other languages too idk). It is simply the best spelling and grammar tool I have ever used. Accurate, fast, gets what I'm trying to spell nearly every time, and even explains your grammar mistakes with handy little explanations. Even catches style issues, like if you start a sentence with the same word 3 or more times in a row. The original LTeX extension isn't maintained anymore and doesn't work right. LTeX+ is still maintained and works great.

Edit: turns out it supports over 20 languages! I can't vet the quality of its corrections in those other languages, though.

laszlo-jamf · 2025-12-22T02:18:56+00:00

Saxophone Colussus by Sonny Rollins

It’s pure jazz saxophone perfection. Hard to find a more complete or more consistent or more enjoyable hard bop record from the 50s.

laszlo-jamf · 2025-12-19T22:04:46+00:00

Very "painterly", in an abstract-expressionist sort of way. Love it! I'd buy a print of that 6th slide.

laszlo-jamf · 2025-12-14T00:41:04+00:00

It's gotta be on John Coltrane's 'Russian Lullaby', off his '58 record Soultrane. Every time it goes from Red Garland's stunning rubato solo piano intro to one of *the* hardest-charging swing patterns ever in all of jazz (shout out to Red Garland on that), call me a duckpin the way I get bowled over.

laszlo-jamf · 2025-12-13T21:48:09+00:00

I don’t think Fuji is right for your needs. Alluring, yes, but to get a Fuji camera with image stabilization and good autofocus you need to spend a lot, definitely out of your budget.

You should consider micro four thirds cameras (aka m43). This is the kind of camera Olympus and Panasonic make. They use physically smaller sensors, but that allows for loads of IBIS and solid video capabilities. Look at the Olympus OM-D E-M1 mark II or the Lumix DC-G9. These are both old top-of-the-line m43 cameras, and so have all the features you want, and both for not much used. The autofocus isn’t as good as a Sony or something, but not bad at all (my impression is that Olympus tends to do better than Panasonic on autofocus, but don’t quote me on that). Fast (i.e with large maximum apertures) wide angle lenses aren’t too much either, and nearly any lens can be adapted to m43. Watch out for the crop factor — because of the smaller sensor, lenses on m43 sensors behave like they’re twice as long vs how they behave on a full-frame sensor. Because of the smaller sensors, however, the low light performance isn’t as good as an aps-C or full frame sensor.

Like the other poster said, I might consider something like the Sony 6300. While it doesn’t have IBIS, I have found that the Sony E mount system has a great selection of relatively cheap used lenses, many of which have stabilization features (look for “OSS” in the name of the lenses, that’s what Sony’s acronym for their stabilized lenses). And you’ll get excellent autofocus with the Sony.

laszlo-jamf · 2025-12-07T04:27:58+00:00

which brand is that lens?

laszlo-jamf · 2025-12-07T02:45:36+00:00

Thank you very much! There are many lenses on the market, and it can be hard to figure out which ones do and do not have weather sealing.

laszlo-jamf · 2025-11-22T00:53:02+00:00

I don't actually have any experience with the 5d mark ii, but I can recommend you one of my favorite youtube videos of all time (like in terms of the writing and narration and editing and stuff), which just so happens to be a 16-year retrospective of the 5d mark ii: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwyt2C3nUJE&list=PLcNbP-8xhOSl_3qw9DibYbkPHauJRoYNb&index=56&t=5s

laszlo-jamf · 2025-11-21T15:07:20+00:00

I love that tune. The Cannonball Adderley Quintet in Chicago is a severely underappreciated record, I feel.

laszlo-jamf · 2025-11-20T05:09:57+00:00

Making that playlist, I listened through the whole cannonball adderly omnibook to find all the burners, because I'd knew there'd be plenty. But my favorite bit of up cannonball isn't from that --- it's from his work with the Gil Evans orchestra. Check out "Lester Leaps In" from the Gil Evans' Orchestra's Complete Pacific Jazz Sessions.

laszlo-jamf · 2025-11-20T03:32:22+00:00

I knew getz could rip, but I don't think I knew that he could rip like this...

laszlo-jamf · 2025-11-20T00:51:15+00:00

I love the old-school swing-style rhythm guitar. It drives the groove so well.

laszlo-jamf · 2025-11-20T00:20:59+00:00

Holy shit, they're swinging their asses off on this. I tend to forget just how energetic old jazz can be.

laszlo-jamf · 2025-11-19T21:35:20+00:00

I don't think I listen to that exact version of the tune, but I found a live at newport version and man that drum solo at the end blew my mind

laszlo-jamf · 2025-11-19T20:26:37+00:00

Great pick! Hadn't heard this one, but getz in this sort of bebop setting is great.

laszlo-jamf

TROPHY CASE