Differences of "Equivelent" time signatures

I think you are perfectly right. I know back in my band days we always played through time sig changes with eights keeping the same temp, even going from a 4/4 to 3/8. Same tempo, different feel.

Also, I always heard that 2/2 was invented back when people had to write scores out by hand. If a piece was in 4/4 time and there were a ton of sixteenth and thirtysecond notes, it was MUCH easier to write it in 2/2 as eights and sixteenths.

24/24 might be alittle weird. It would probably wind up being the same, just notation would be crazy trying to represent 24th notes.

The difference is not in the number of notes per measure, but in where the "hard" down-beats are.

In 4/4 Time the count is something like this:

Hard soft medium soft

In 2/2 Time the count is more like this:

Hard soft

In 8/8 you get:

hard soft soft soft medium soft soft soft

In practice, it's the rare rythym section that can really let you hear the difference, but they do exist, and usually your first thought when hearing such a band is something like "wow, they're really tight."

As Kingpatzer notes, there are differences... some are technical (like the difference between 2/2 and 4/4 - 4/4 adds that extra 'medium' stress), others are psychological... if a piece is written in 3/8, a conductor will likely play it a bit faster than a piece in 3/4 - even if they have the same tempo indication.

Some technical differences are more subtle than others. Cut time is sometimes said to be the same as 2/2, but it's not - it's really a doubled-speed 4/4.

There's no technical difference at all between 3/8 and 3/4 - both have three beats, one accented and two unaccented. The only difference is the note used to represent one beat. But there are traditions... 3/4 says 'I'm a waltz', 3/8 says 'I'm a fandango' - and the fandango is a faster dance than a waltz. So if the performance notes say it's Allegro, the waltz will might be played around 138-144 bpm, while the fandango might move along at 152 or so.

Thanks alot, speaking of accents, here's another question: say when i'm writing a melody, if i want it to be strong, would i work with the strong accents and keep the chord tones and root notes on the strong accents???

So, say I'm playing a melody in C with 3/4 time and I want it to be strong, I could play a C on beat one, followed by a sequence of eighth notes (E, F, E, G, for example) followed by E or C on beat one of the next measure. Would this create a very natural sounding melody? as opposed to playing a chord tone on beat 2 or 3, or not resolving to a chord tone at all?

Hey, yeah, it does seem like a 2/2 or 4/4 time signature should just be "1."
:lol:

A couple of other differences as pointed out in an old thread plus a piece I am playing now.
First the piece I am playing now "Remember when" by Alan Jackson
I am playing in 4/4 time then 1 bar of 2/4 just before the verse.
I play a half note in the 2/4 bar and the reason is appearant. I needed a bar with only 2 beats to fit things together (the very first bar is also 2/4 for a lead part)
Second difference is in counting, 4/4 going to 8/8 then back to 4/4 if the music stipulates 1/4 note = XXbpm then the 8/8 bar would maintain the same speed. But if not stipulated you would tend to play the 8/8 bar faster.

When a time signature changes, the rule of thumb in notation is pretty simple... if the top number changes, but the bottom stays the same (i.e., 4/4 becomes 3/4), the tempo of beats does not change.

If the bottom number changes, the composer should place a note over the change showing what note in the new beat equals a note in the old beat. If you're changing from 4/4 to 4/8, the notation would say eighth note = quarter note to keep the beat the same, and eighth note = eighth note if the tempo will double. Of course, they can also use the standard bpm notation... but they shouldn't rely on tempo terms like allegro.

That keeps everything nice and clear.