Incomplete tuplets - yes or no?

[erelievonen]

There seems to exist a notation software that can natively notate incomplete tuplets. If I'm not mistaken, the program in question is Encore. (I did not compose these, neither have I ever used Encore myself.)

If we accept the non-standard rhythmical notation, then these measures are mathematically correct, even if very difficult for a human performer to decipher. I would indeed be surprised if anyone here thought this is acceptable notation. After all, there are other standard ways of spelling out the same rhythms. (FYI, the tempo is quarter=88.)

My question for discussion is: is it even desirable that a notation program be capable of such notation (without special workarounds)? As can be seen here, such a possibility is liable to be misused.

tuplets1.jpg (37.13 KiB) Viewed 12761 times

tuplets2.jpg (23.4 KiB) Viewed 12762 times

[OCTO]

That is difficult to read, definitely.
I would say even incorrect.

About the question: the error lies as a result in misuse of good things.
No software is immune of human errors, be it in program itself or otherwise.

[John Ruggero]

I agree with OCTO.

My ideal notation would able to do everything, even crazy things, which might prove to be not so crazy after all. And I certainly don't want to be "protected" by the software...

[tisimst]

While it is less traditional, I can’t see it as a problem or incorrect or something a software should intentionally be programmed to NOT do. Why not give flexibility where needed? There’s a lot of modern scores that are waaaaay “worse” than the samples shown here.

FWIW, LilyPond handles this effortlessly.

[erelievonen]

There’s a lot of modern scores that are waaaaay “worse” than the samples shown here.

That's beside the point. In this specific example, it's entirely pointless to use incomplete triplets, as the same rhythms could be written using regular complete triplets.

And my question was: "is it even desirable that a notation program be capable of such notation (without special workarounds)?" I didn't say that a notation program should be made completely incapable of such notation. But if such notation is made as easy to create as standard notation, there are bound to be people who mistakenly think that using that notation would be just fine in any situation. I hope we agree that it's not.

[tisimst]

Don’t worry. We’re on the same page.

[OCTO]

Right, Ere!