no the snare would still be on the e and the aSo if the hihat note between the last two snare notes wasn't there, those two snare hits would be 8ths ( 4resting + a )? It's the hihat in between that makes the snare hits 16ths? Do I have this right?
you count 16th notes - 1E+A 2E+A 3E+A 4E+ABut the last two snare hits are farther apart than the previous two 16th snare hits?
When I listen to the actual song, the last two snare hits sound further apart than the previous two.you count 16th notes - 1E+A 2E+A 3E+A 4E+A
those two snare hits are on the E and the A of 4 and they always will be no matter what you take away
the two previous snare hits are on the + and the A of 3 ... those two beats are right next to each other that's why they are closer together
I see what you’re saying.So if the hihat note between the last two snare notes wasn't there, those two snare hits would be 8ths ( 4resting + a )? It's the hihat in between that makes the snare hits 16ths? Do I have this right?
yes...that is where I was taking it. Not sure if it's helpfulI see what you’re saying.
Yes, if you disregard the hi-hat strike and just observe the remaining snare hits and their timing to each other, then yes, the VALUE between those snare hits (identified “E“ & “AH”) is the exact same value and relationship which a “1” & “AND” would share together.
Therefore in your example, those last two snare strikes are as if you took a coupling of 2 eighth notes and slid them to the right by an increment of a 16th note. (If it helps to look at it that way, which I gather is where you were taking it.)