Using John Varney's rhythm wheel to differentiate 3/4 and 6/8 time signatures

Bug: rapid calls to 3&#x2F;4 get parsed as 6&#x2F;8<p>1. Take the 3&#x2F;4 example and convince yourself you fully understand the difference between 3&#x2F;4 time and 6&#x2F;8 time.<p>2. Let your ostensible understanding lead you to listen to a waltz.<p>3. Get familiar enough with the waltz that you can sing along with the melody.<p>4. Now ask yourself: does the melody sound like it divide up into <i>groups</i> of measures, or is the melody just freely moving around in no discernible pattern?<p>5. Realize very quickly that the melody divides up into groups of measures.<p>6. Realize that the melody <i>very likely</i> divides up into groups of <i>two</i> measures to build larger phrases.<p>7. Realize that many waltzes move at a rapid <i>tempo</i> so that each measure of 3&#x2F;4 moves by quite quickly.<p>8. Realize that regularly recurring fast 3&#x2F;4 measures which divide up perceptually into two-measure groups sounds exactly like... 6&#x2F;8.<p>This bug affects all CPUs.<p>The only currently known workarounds are genre literacy and knowledge of notational convention.

While being a marching band nerd, we always thought of 3&#x2F;8 as 6&#x2F;8 for the simple fact that one is always the left foot. Counting in 3&#x2F;8 would alternate one to be on the right every other measure. It&#x27;s hard enough to get new members to march to the right beat, but having 3&#x2F;8 time was just never going to work even for experienced members

I&#x27;m a pretty non-musical person, and time signatures have always confused me. Unfortunately, this explanation left me just as confused. I can hear the difference between the two sample beats but I cannot figure out how to generalize this to other time signatures beyond the 3&#x2F;4 and 6&#x2F;8 described here.

There is no difference between 3&#x2F;4 and 6&#x2F;8 unless you are trying to decide on which one makes your score easier to read. It&#x27;s just different ways of conceptualizing the phrase. Mathematically (and therefore rhythmically) they are the same, of course. Maybe the site is trying to make some other differentiation but it didn&#x27;t work at all in Firefox.<p>(Source: I am a professional drummer)

Hm, not sure I like the example for 6&#x2F;8 time. It&#x27;s so much slower tempo than 3&#x2F;4 time example that it&#x27;s very hard to compare the two for me.

It would have been nice with a negative example, e.g being able to play the 6&#x2F;8th on top of the 3&#x2F;4th piece, in a suitable tempo.

A lot of work into visualization and media on that page. Impressive.<p>But a minor nit... I wish the publisher had done a more apples-to-apples comparison between 6&#x2F;8 and 6&#x2F;4.<p>3&#x2F;4 is universally accepted to be a Waltz by composers and performers.<p>However, there&#x27;s not much consensus in the 6 and 7 beat signatures whether the notes should be quarter or eighth notes.

Site doesn’t work for shit on mobile.

Side note: If you&#x27;re on Chrome and you check the JS console, you&#x27;ll see that the audio for this page will stop working in October when Chrome reinstates the ill-considered audio policy they rolled out in May and then removed because it broke a bunch of sites.<p>The audio policy in question:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developers.google.com&#x2F;web&#x2F;updates&#x2F;2017&#x2F;09&#x2F;autoplay-policy-changes#webaudio" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developers.google.com&#x2F;web&#x2F;updates&#x2F;2017&#x2F;09&#x2F;autoplay-p...</a><p>HN discussion when the policy was instated&#x2F;removed:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=17079724" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=17079724</a>

The way I understood it was that 3&#x2F;4 is used to notate waltzes and other music where you are supposed to &quot;feel&quot; all three beats per bar, and 6&#x2F;8 is used to notate music where you only &quot;feel&quot; the downbeats. Things like swung rhythms. Though (again as I understand it) actual swing music is often notated in common or cut time, but played as though the first eighth note of each beat is about twice as long as the second.<p>Just to pick two of my favorite songs: per my understanding, the opening theme to Vision of Escaflowne would be notated in 3&#x2F;4, while &quot;Flagpole Sitta&quot; by Harvey Danger might be notated in 6&#x2F;8.

I think a lot of the confusion&#x2F;misunderstanding around here has to do with how folks are defining &quot;beat&quot;; seems like folks are defining the &quot;beat&quot; to be each eighth-note, when (in my experience) it&#x27;s actually each quarter note, whether plain (for 3&#x2F;4) or dotted (for 6&#x2F;8).<p>That is: 6&#x2F;8 is approximated not by 3&#x2F;4, but rather by a very-triplet-heavy 2&#x2F;4.<p>The article explains this somewhat (&quot;one and two and three and&quot; v. &quot;one and ah two and ah&quot;), but the comparisons&#x2F;examples don&#x27;t really do a good job of demonstrating it in practice.

Site&#x27;s trying to imply that any slower 2&#x2F;4 rhythm subdivided into triplets can be re-written as 6&#x2F;8, whereas 3&#x2F;4 does not have more rhythmic subdivisions in the three beats.

I wish I could use that to better understand the beat of Pink Floyd hit &quot;Money&quot; that was composed in 7 &#x2F; 8 ...

Oh now I see.<p>6&#x2F;8, <i>in typical musical theory fashion</i>, is an awful name for something like (3&#x2F;4)&#x2F;2<p>It is technically precise and in practice misses the point completely.<p>(And don&#x27;t get me started on mode names. Just don&#x27;t)