# meter desigantion for rach 2nd mov't 2nd concerto



## larzscape (5 mo ago)

would someone explain the meter designation for the second mov't "C" common time i know the 8th notes are played "straight' but why then are they grouped as triplets, and why does it go to 3/2 in those specific measures thx in advance- Larry


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Are you asking about this (bar 5)?










They ARE triplets, just not indicated with a "3" above. It is common practice to leave the 3 out for simplicity's sake and to make the already complex part as easy to read a possible.

The 3/2 is easy: there are now 6 beats in the measure, so it could have been 6/4 but Rachmaninoff was not only a great pianist and composer, he was also a great conductor and fully realized it would be clear to conduct 3 subdivided beats in a bar rather than 6.


----------



## larzscape (5 mo ago)

mbhaub said:


> Are you asking about this (bar 5)?
> 
> View attachment 173763
> 
> ...


thanks for your input; i'm still not quite sold on the idea of rach just leavng out the "3" for simplicity, as he clearly puts it in other places in both first and second piano- it seems more like a hemiola thing, only within the bar- i do agree about the 3/2 thanks again for your input!!! ( and there is no stipulation accenting the first note of a group of 3 , but that is the way the natural pulse falls on a regular trip)


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

....it's quite clear to a musician that the groupings are triplets. Not every beat needs a number and bracket especially if the first tuplet is marked as such and especially when the groupings are obvious. To clutter a score with repeated numbers and brackets for a consistent use of the same tuplet is unnecessary. The 3/2 rhythm you mention is syncopation and/or hemiola (the same thing really), depending on how you look at it or hear it and the conductor beats in 4 crotchets as one would expect.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

larzscape said:


> thanks for your input; i'm still not quite sold on the idea of rach just leavng out the "3" for simplicity, as he clearly puts it in other places in both first and second piano- it seems more like a hemiola thing, only within the bar- i do agree about the 3/2 thanks again for your input!!! ( and there is no stipulation accenting the first note of a group of 3 , but that is the way the natural pulse falls on a regular trip)


Notation marks, like the 3 in triplets, are omitted all the time by most composers. As Mikeh375 says, no musician would have trouble reading it. There are some composers who would have done this: write the piano part in 12/8 while the orchestra is in 4/4. This avoids the need for triplet notation. There are examples of this in Tchaikovsky symphonies.


----------

