2

Why is this

enter image description here

transcribed like this

enter image description here

It seems much more obvious to me to fit it into 3/2 time:

enter image description here

Maybe the clue is in the 'split common-time' symbol? But perhaps it didn't have the same meaning in those days?

  • Er, don't know, I thought I had one account under two different forums? – Tom Sharpe Dec 1 '17 at 12:44
  • I don't agree with the counter-proposal, since then the strong division after enstsprungen (in most verses even marked by a comma or colon) is no longer a remarkable position within the bar at all. It is surely not related to the alla breve time signature. – guidot Dec 1 '17 at 12:54
  • Still not convinced - why should a word like 'aus' or 'von' (falling on the first beat of the bar in the transcribed version) have a stress on it? There's nothing to stop a singer taking a short breath after 'entsprungen' in either version. – Tom Sharpe Dec 1 '17 at 13:12
  • The 3/2 timing doesn't scan the words well at all. – Tim Dec 1 '17 at 14:06
  • 1
    FWIW I agree, I've always heard that piece as if it was 3/2 rather than 4/4. But really, neither works very well in a modern interpretation; it's just an entirely different understanding of metre. The best fit in terms of a fixed metre might actually be 5/4, with the bars starting on 𝄽 , "Ros", "aus" and "Wur-" (the "-sprungen" would then only be dotted crotchets, rather than breves). – leftaroundabout Dec 2 '17 at 10:55
1

This is an example of mensural notation, common in the 14th and 15th centuries. You are correct that the clue is the split common-time symbol, which was one of the symbols (along with the common time symbol) that carried over into modern notation. (By the way, this wasn't a "c" for "common," rather it was an open circle for "imperfect" time, meaning a breve divided into two semibreves instead of three.)

Imperfect time is generally translated into 4/4 time, whether there's a line through the C or not. While this particular tune may work as a 3/2 melody, that isn't the intent given by the notation. If it were intended as 3/2, the time signature would be a circle, optionally with a line through it.

  • Nice answer, thank you. Also having looked at some versions of 'A great and mighty wonder' one here partially in 3/2 openhymnal.org/Pdf/… and another effectively in 5/2 I can see that I'm not alone in asking the question. – Tom Sharpe Dec 2 '17 at 11:06
  • I am far from expert on mensural notation, but it seems clear that it is far more ambiguous than modern notation. Probably the reason it got supplanted. – BobRodes Dec 2 '17 at 19:21

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.