Tie or slur

[Hans Aberg]

If a 1/8 note with a trill sign above is extended to a 1/16 note of the
same pitch (with no trill), is that a tie or a slur? A modern trill in
this situation will end on the note above, but the notes written are the
same. If the trill is written out, it would thus be a slur.

Hans Aberg

[Tom K.]

Post by Hans Aberg
If a 1/8 note with a trill sign above is extended to a 1/16 note of the
same pitch (with no trill), is that a tie or a slur? A modern trill in
this situation will end on the note above, but the notes written are the
same. If the trill is written out, it would thus be a slur.

Hans, wouldn't the 16th note have to have it's own attack, thus requiring
neither slur nor tie?

If the trill were to be continued through the 16th note, then a broken line
tie would clearly show your intentions.

Tom K.

[l***@altavista.com]

Post by Tom K.

Post by Hans Aberg
If a 1/8 note with a trill sign above is extended to a 1/16 note of the
same pitch (with no trill), is that a tie or a slur? A modern trill in
this situation will end on the note above, but the notes written are the
same. If the trill is written out, it would thus be a slur.

Hans, wouldn't the 16th note have to have it's own attack, thus requiring
neither slur nor tie?
If the trill were to be continued through the 16th note, then a broken line
tie would clearly show your intentions.
Tom K.

Doesn't every note in a trill, whether explicitly written or indicated
by the trill symbol, have its own attack? If so, what is so
significant by the 16th note having its own attack?

[Steve Latham]

Post by l***@altavista.com

Post by Tom K.

Post by Hans Aberg
If a 1/8 note with a trill sign above is extended to a 1/16 note of the
same pitch (with no trill), is that a tie or a slur? A modern trill in
this situation will end on the note above, but the notes written are the
same. If the trill is written out, it would thus be a slur.

Hans, wouldn't the 16th note have to have it's own attack, thus requiring
neither slur nor tie?
If the trill were to be continued through the 16th note, then a broken line
tie would clearly show your intentions.
Tom K.

Doesn't every note in a trill, whether explicitly written or indicated
by the trill symbol, have its own attack?

No.

Steve

[Steve Latham]

Post by l***@altavista.com
Doesn't every note in a trill, whether explicitly written or indicated
by the trill symbol, have its own attack?

No.
Steve

Sorry lavron, that was a bit abrupt :-)

"attack" usually means "articulation". You can play:

D C D C D C D C articulated, which means if you were a guitar player, you'd
pluck every note, if you were a flute player, you'd tongue every note, if
you were a violin player, you'd bow every note, etc.

You can play:

D C D C D C D C with only the first note articulated, and the rest slurred
which means for guitar, you'd pluck the first note and hammer on/pull off
the remaining notes, flute, tongue the first note, continue the stream of
air while alternating the fingerings, violin, start with one bow direction
then move one finger back and forth under the same bow.

Most trills are assumed to be unarticulated - slurred - obviously it's kind
of hard to pick, tongue, or bow at the rate most trills go. So no, every
note in a trill does not have its own attack, only the first, the remainder
are slurred (i.e. not "attacked"). That's part of why we use a main note
with an ornament.

If you're only talking about an instrument like piano, yes, it does have an
individual attack on every note of the trill because piano can't produce
true slurs. Not all instruments are subject to this limitation though.

Best,
Steve

[l***@altavista.com]

Post by Steve Latham

Post by l***@altavista.com
Doesn't every note in a trill, whether explicitly written or indicated
by the trill symbol, have its own attack?

No.
Steve

Sorry lavron, that was a bit abrupt :-)
D C D C D C D C articulated, which means if you were a guitar player, you'd
pluck every note, if you were a flute player, you'd tongue every note, if
you were a violin player, you'd bow every note, etc.
D C D C D C D C with only the first note articulated, and the rest slurred
which means for guitar, you'd pluck the first note and hammer on/pull off
the remaining notes, flute, tongue the first note, continue the stream of
air while alternating the fingerings, violin, start with one bow direction
then move one finger back and forth under the same bow.
Most trills are assumed to be unarticulated - slurred - obviously it's kind
of hard to pick, tongue, or bow at the rate most trills go. So no, every
note in a trill does not have its own attack, only the first, the remainder
are slurred (i.e. not "attacked"). That's part of why we use a main note
with an ornament.
If you're only talking about an instrument like piano, yes, it does have an
individual attack on every note of the trill because piano can't produce
true slurs. Not all instruments are subject to this limitation though.
Best,
Steve

Thank you both, Steve Latham and Hans Aberg, for your explanation. But
this makes me wonder about tremolo as played by strings. Here the
movement is also very fast, but the bow speedily changes directions.
In this case, is an attack present in the notes which follow the
first?

[Hans Aberg]

Post by l***@altavista.com
Thank you both, Steve Latham and Hans Aberg, for your explanation. But
this makes me wonder about tremolo as played by strings. Here the
movement is also very fast, but the bow speedily changes directions.
In this case, is an attack present in the notes which follow the
first?

I think it depends on whether the tremolo is fats enough to be considered
a replacement of a single note. This is would be the case on a mandolin.

Otherwise put: if the speed is 1/4 = 120-144, then one can make an
individual attack on the 1/16 notes but not on the 1/32 notes. So if you
have a 1/16 note broken up up two 1/32 notes, the attack would
be mainly on the first note, but also carried over a bit on the second
note.

My guess.

Hans Aberg

[Steve Latham]

Post by l***@altavista.com
Thank you both, Steve Latham and Hans Aberg, for your explanation. But
this makes me wonder about tremolo as played by strings. Here the
movement is also very fast, but the bow speedily changes directions.
In this case, is an attack present in the notes which follow the
first?

I think it depends on whether the tremolo is fats enough to be considered
a replacement of a single note. This is would be the case on a mandolin.

I should say, stylistically, some instruments in some styles will naturally
"roll" or play tremolo on long notes on instruments like Hammered Dulcimer
or Mandolin - so while many people write in tremolo for thos instruments, a
player may play a tremolo on any note longer than an 1/8th note in much the
same way a violinist is likely to add vibrato to any note longer than a
couple of milliseconds :-)

Tremolo on mandolin is played with alternate picking (the fact that is has
double-string courses is ignored - in theory you always play two notes
every time you pluck, but the attacks are so close you can't really hear
them as separate events). So there is an attack on every note.

With hammered dulcimer, you "roll" the hammers like doing a roll with
drumsticks or mallet percussion mallets (hammered dulcimer is like Cimbalom
and there are other folk instruments similar to it especially in Slavic
countries IIRC).

In a sense, there really is a new articulation or "attack" for each strike
of the hammer, but we tend to hear it more as one note. So Hans' point about
the speed might be a factor - slow enough and I think we'd consider every
repeated pitch a new attack. But, for practical purposes, tremolandi (that's
plural of tremolo) are usually thought of as a "single" articulated note
(the first one) and the entire duration is a "note", not a "bunch of notes".

So before I said tremolo has every single note "attacked" or articulated,
but the way we notate it and think of it, we treat the tremolo'd note as a
unit. Therefore, you could have the melody line C E D C with a slur over
the first three notes, with all of them played tremolo which would tell the
player to do something special on the last C to make it "re-articulate"
(probably accent it on most instruments, or, for others, make a minute
break).

Steve

[Hans Aberg]

Post by Steve Latham

Post by l***@altavista.com
Thank you both, Steve Latham and Hans Aberg, for your explanation. But
this makes me wonder about tremolo as played by strings. Here the
movement is also very fast, but the bow speedily changes directions.
In this case, is an attack present in the notes which follow the
first?

I think it depends on whether the tremolo is fats enough to be considered
a replacement of a single note. This is would be the case on a mandolin.

With hammered dulcimer, you "roll" the hammers like doing a roll with
drumsticks or mallet percussion mallets (hammered dulcimer is like Cimbalom
and there are other folk instruments similar to it especially in Slavic
countries IIRC).
In a sense, there really is a new articulation or "attack" for each strike
of the hammer, but we tend to hear it more as one note.

Yes, I meant "attack" in the musical sense of initiating the note.

Post by Steve Latham
So Hans' point about
the speed might be a factor - slow enough and I think we'd consider every
repeated pitch a new attack. But, for practical purposes, tremolandi (that's
plural of tremolo) are usually thought of as a "single" articulated note
(the first one) and the entire duration is a "note", not a "bunch of notes".

So if the tremolo is quick enough, even if there are attacks on the
subsequent notes in the physical or acoustic sense, it will be perceived
as a single note.

Hans Aberg

[Steve Latham]

Post by Hans Aberg
So if the tremolo is quick enough, even if there are attacks on the
subsequent notes in the physical or acoustic sense, it will be perceived
as a single note.

And I think this is even more true on something like Vibraphone - where the
sustained sound of the key ringing, and the attack of the mallet (especially
if using yarn mallets) are virtually equal, so in a sense one is just
"keeping the note going" - not unlike Bowing on strings. On something like
Mandolin, where the sustained portion of a note is much shorter, the pick
attacks are much more direct in relation.

But on all of them, whether we perceive individual attacks or not within the
sound, the notation is that of a single element (note with tremolo marking).

Best,
Steve

[Hans Aberg]

Post by Steve Latham

Post by Hans Aberg
So if the tremolo is quick enough, even if there are attacks on the
subsequent notes in the physical or acoustic sense, it will be perceived
as a single note.

And I think this is even more true on something like Vibraphone - where the
sustained sound of the key ringing, and the attack of the mallet (especially
if using yarn mallets) are virtually equal, so in a sense one is just
"keeping the note going" - not unlike Bowing on strings. On something like
Mandolin, where the sustained portion of a note is much shorter, the pick
attacks are much more direct in relation.

Also, on instruments like a piano, where he note envelope can' be
controoled after the attack, one might use an ornament (like a trill), in
order to achieve that effect.

Post by Steve Latham
But on all of them, whether we perceive individual attacks or not within the
sound, the notation is that of a single element (note with tremolo marking).

Yes. Hindemith, "Elementary Training", also points out the notation with
two notes on separate stems and hanging beams between. If one wants to be
sure to have the effect of a trill or a tremolo done as fast as possible
without a structure, one should simply add enough with beams.

Hans Aberg

[LJS]

Post by Steve Latham

Post by Hans Aberg
So if the tremolo is quick enough, even if there are attacks on the
subsequent notes in the physical or acoustic sense, it will be perceived
as a single note.

And I think this is even more true on something like Vibraphone - where the
sustained sound of the key ringing, and the attack of the mallet (especially
if using yarn mallets) are virtually equal, so in a sense one is just
"keeping the note going" - not unlike Bowing on strings. On something like
Mandolin, where the sustained portion of a note is much shorter, the pick
attacks are much more direct in relation.
But on all of them, whether we perceive individual attacks or not within the
sound, the notation is that of a single element (note with tremolo marking).
Best,
Steve

Just for clarification, the vibraphone is capable of various types of
articulation with the pedal. The pedal is capable of either letting
the note ring free, dampening the note to a very short duration, or
being half (or any other degree of pressure on the bar) stopped with a
controlled duration of the length of the tone.
LJS

[Steve Latham]

Post by l***@altavista.com
Thank you both, Steve Latham and Hans Aberg, for your explanation. But
this makes me wonder about tremolo as played by strings. Here the
movement is also very fast, but the bow speedily changes directions.
In this case, is an attack present in the notes which follow the
first?

Caution here Lavron, there's two types of tremolo on strings: bowed and
fingered - and there may be a "hybrid" form we might call "undulating".

A tremolo should really be, by definition, the same pitch repeated. And yes,
in that sense, strings and everyone else produce a new attack for each note.

However, strings can play repeated notes under the same bow, called loure,
where really it's a solid note with breaks in it - so it should be
"non-articulated" - this is written as repeated pitches with staccato dots
over the notes and a slur over the group.

A trill should really be, by definition, two pitches in alternation.

We know that C C C C C C is a tremolo. On strings this would have to be
played with alternate bowing.

C D C D C D is a trill - usually, even on strings, only the first note is
attacked - thus for strings it's under one bow (unless it's very long, etc.)

C Eb C Eb C Eb has been called - wait for it - a tremolo! Argggh. It really
isn't (and a tremolo bar or tremolo bridge on a guitar isn't either!). But
they ended up calling it a "tremolo" - maybe because the same motion might
have been used to produce it, or, especially on Piano where a single pitch
tremolo is somewhat cumbersome, this was the closest thing a pianist could
do. Really C Eb C Eb C Eb belongs in the "trill" family.

Nonetheless, the names have stuck, so in strings, rapid alternation of two
pitches that are more than a M2 apart is called a fingered tremolo. These,
like trills, are usually played under one bow.

A Bowed tremolo for strings is usually understood to be what would be a
standard tremolo (or fluttertongue for flute, etc.) for other instruments -
single repeated pitch.

Then the "undulating" tremolo would be one found on adjacent strings. It can
be played under one bow or with alternating bow, but by nature one would
have to bow slower anyway.

Best,
Steve

[Hans Aberg]

Post by l***@altavista.com

Post by Tom K.

Post by Hans Aberg
If a 1/8 note with a trill sign above is extended to a 1/16 note of the
same pitch (with no trill), is that a tie or a slur? A modern trill in
this situation will end on the note above, but the notes written are the
same. If the trill is written out, it would thus be a slur.

Hans, wouldn't the 16th note have to have it's own attack, thus requiring
neither slur nor tie?
If the trill were to be continued through the 16th note, then a broken line
tie would clearly show your intentions.

Doesn't every note in a trill, whether explicitly written or indicated
by the trill symbol, have its own attack? If so, what is so
significant by the 16th note having its own attack?

I think the attack is really referring to the first note initiation. In a
trill, the movement is typically too fast for any real attack to place on
the individual note of the trill, except the first one. If it is so slow
that it is possible, it would probably not be noted as a trill.

Hans Aberg

[Hans Aberg]

Post by Tom K.

Post by Hans Aberg
If a 1/8 note with a trill sign above is extended to a 1/16 note of the
same pitch (with no trill), is that a tie or a slur? A modern trill in
this situation will end on the note above, but the notes written are the
same. If the trill is written out, it would thus be a slur.

Hans, wouldn't the 16th note have to have it's own attack, thus requiring
neither slur nor tie?

Not the case I have in mind. Though the instrument is an accordion, the
performance is without a break: a continuous trill ending with a 1/16th
note.

Post by Tom K.
If the trill were to be continued through the 16th note, then a broken line
tie would clearly show your intentions.

This style alos exists, even with the trill broken up in 1/16ths and
spaces between all three 1/16ths. Just not in the case I have in mind.

You can see it here:
http://math.su.se/~haberg/GeamparareleDeLaConstanta-detailed.pdf

Hans Aberg

[Steve Latham]

Post by Hans Aberg
If a 1/8 note with a trill sign above is extended to a 1/16 note of the
same pitch (with no trill), is that a tie or a slur? A modern trill in
this situation will end on the note above, but the notes written are the
same. If the trill is written out, it would thus be a slur.
Hans Aberg

Hans,

Do you mean a note that is 3-16ths in duration where the trill only covers
he first 2-16ths' worth of time?

If that's the case, yes, you should write an 8th note tied to a 16th, with
the trill line extending until (ending by) the 16th note. 20th century
notation has included a vertical line at the end of the trill to show
specifically that it ends before the 16th note unit in question:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^|
e-i-g-h-t-h---n-o-t-e---tie - then 16th after the vertical slash.

This indicates the player is supposed to play, with one attack, a note
3-16ths long and trill for only the first 2-16ths' worth of time and
continue to hold the note after the trilling has stopped.

You could do the same with a played note, tied to a note which is to be
trilled, tied to another played note - say three quarters long where only
the middle 1 beat is trilled.

By the way, the ending of either example is like:

DCDCDCDCDCDC| C - notice the trill ends on the main note and then is TIED to
a note of the SAME pitch. Basically, you play a C and then move some finger
to get a D, then stop trilling at some point.

Now, if you want to be persnickity and say:
DCDCDCDCD | C and in theory the D moves to C then a SLUR would be in order.
However, that's completely counter to the whole idea of using a "main" note
and an unwritten slurred to note in traditional notation. The ties and slurs
are formed form the main note, not the ornament. Besides the fact that since
it's the same pitch, you can't really tell if it's a slur or tie - everyone
would assume a tie. Thus 20th century notation accepts this and simplifies
matters by just using the main note tied to the same pitch later (or before
as in my second example).

Steve

[Hans Aberg]

Post by Steve Latham

Post by Hans Aberg
If a 1/8 note with a trill sign above is extended to a 1/16 note of the
same pitch (with no trill), is that a tie or a slur? A modern trill in
this situation will end on the note above, but the notes written are the
same. If the trill is written out, it would thus be a slur.

Do you mean a note that is 3-16ths in duration where the trill only covers
he first 2-16ths' worth of time?

Yes. Actually, I have put it up, what I have done so far:
http://math.su.se/~haberg/GeamparareleDeLaConstanta-detailed.pdf
http://math.su.se/~haberg/GeamparareleDeLaConstanta.m4a

Post by Steve Latham
If that's the case, yes, you should write an 8th note tied to a 16th, with
the trill line extending until (ending by) the 16th note. 20th century
notation has included a vertical line at the end of the trill to show
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^|
e-i-g-h-t-h---n-o-t-e---tie - then 16th after the vertical slash.

That seems a good idea. But in the case it is perhaps too short for that.
I'll look into it.

Post by Steve Latham
This indicates the player is supposed to play, with one attack, a note
3-16ths long and trill for only the first 2-16ths' worth of time and
continue to hold the note after the trilling has stopped.

Yes. That is how it is done.

Post by Steve Latham
You could do the same with a played note, tied to a note which is to be
trilled, tied to another played note - say three quarters long where only
the middle 1 beat is trilled.
DCDCDCDCDCDC| C - notice the trill ends on the main note and then is TIED to
a note of the SAME pitch. Basically, you play a C and then move some finger
to get a D, then stop trilling at some point.

In this case it is a tie. But the playing is actually as
F#GF#G~F#

Post by Steve Latham
DCDCDCDCD | C and in theory the D moves to C then a SLUR would be in order.

Right. This is how it is. When written out, it is a slur.

Post by Steve Latham
However, that's completely counter to the whole idea of using a "main" note
and an unwritten slurred to note in traditional notation. The ties and slurs
are formed form the main note, not the ornament. Besides the fact that since
it's the same pitch, you can't really tell if it's a slur or tie - everyone
would assume a tie. Thus 20th century notation accepts this and simplifies
matters by just using the main note tied to the same pitch later (or before
as in my second example).

In the program (LilyPond), I have to decide whther it is a tie or a slur.
In principle, it might make a difference in typesetting. Therefore, I got
to think about it.

Musically, perhaps it is a tie, because it is a single, main note, that
starts with an ornament and is extended in time. But when writing
ornaments out, it must be a slur.

Hans Aberg

[LJS]

Post by Hans Aberg
If a 1/8 note with a trill sign above is extended to a 1/16 note of the
same pitch (with no trill), is that a tie or a slur? A modern trill in
this situation will end on the note above, but the notes written are the
same. If the trill is written out, it would thus be a slur.
Hans Aberg

Reverse the question and you have:

IF there is a slur, it would indicate that the 16th would be slurred
to the 8th but that the 16th would occur in its exact metrical
position slurred from the last note of the trill.

IF there is no slur, then the 16th would again be placed in its
metrical position, but with a separate attack of its own.

(some of the other posts are really quite revealing!!)
LJS

[Hans Aberg]

Post by LJS

Post by Hans Aberg
If a 1/8 note with a trill sign above is extended to a 1/16 note of the
same pitch (with no trill), is that a tie or a slur? A modern trill in
this situation will end on the note above, but the notes written are the
same. If the trill is written out, it would thus be a slur.

IF there is a slur, it would indicate that the 16th would be slurred
to the 8th but that the 16th would occur in its exact metrical
position slurred from the last note of the trill.
IF there is no slur, then the 16th would again be placed in its
metrical position, but with a separate attack of its own.

Sure, but all that is discussed is when a trill ornament ends with 1/16th,
and if it is then theoretically called a slur or a tie. So the situation
with a separate attack is not under consideration here.

Hans Aberg