How is this a 6/8? The notes can’t fit
The measure comes from Metallica "Nothing Else Matters" guitar solo.
Music: Practice & Theory Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for musicians, students, and enthusiasts. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
Usually when a question mentions "too many notes", it means there are multiple voices. The 1/16th rest looks like it might belong to a different voice. EDIT: The question did not mention "Nothing Else Matters" when I wrote this answer.
If you look at the accompaniment guide written above the staff, below the chord symbols D5, C5, G, F#, there's a clear rhythm that fits in 6/8, and it lines up with the notes on the staff.
So: the 1/16th rest in the middle is not part of the timeline. If you leave it out, there's no problem.
The extra rest was perhaps left there by accident. Notation programs usually warn or prevent the user from entering more notes and rests in a bar that can fit the time signature, but e.g. by using multiple voices and hiding some of them it is possible to create a situation shown in the picture. In some applications it's even possible to disregard the time signature and enter a different amount of elements.
The measure comes from solo of "Nothing Else Matters" by Metallica. The first warning sign is that it is notated in 6/8 while the original song is in 3/4 (but see the edits below). This suggest the score is not well written, and indeed there is a mistake in the measure you quoted.
You can find better rhythm notation in this video:
Edit: After browsing the internet I found many scores notating the song in various combinations of 6/8, 9/8 and 3/8. I would personally still believe 3/4 better represents the music. Here some people argue that 6/4 would work the best https://www.quora.com/Why-is-the-time-signature-of-Metallicas-%E2%80%98Nothing-Else-Matters%E2%80%99-6-8-and-not-6-4 I withdraw my initial criticism, but this also deserves a separate question.
As you see there are differences in interpretation of the rhythm. At this moment I'm not sure what is the reason. I think in the version you quoted they tried to notate the rhythm from the last picture I show, but they omitted the triplet sign, making the notation nonsensical.