Help needed

I'm a music-brainlet trying to read it. While I was looking through some piano piece I noticed the staffs of two notes were touching.
Does this mean anything?

Attached: 324532.png (422x377, 260K)

No, read as written.

no

You start at the note in the top staff and run your hand along the keys until you reach the note in the bottom staff

Theoryfag here

No particular meaning. One might interpret it that it's to suggest using right hand for those three notes, if it wasn't obvious.

Attached: keaton-music-typewriter-fb__700-png.jpg (700x368, 62K)

If playing a piano, play F and E at the same time with 5th and 4th finger and treat it as one eight note.

It means they're gay. Play them gayly

Its called a grandstaff. Like every other aspect of musical notation, its predictably retarded. Music 2 coming soon.

Attached: Alt.jpg (759x343, 36K)

Those are note stems not staffs. But as others have said there's no meaning

Yeah, I'm sure something you pulled out of your ass is better than the system that has existed, basically uncontested for half a millennium.

It's generally only for the purpose of readability, notes below middle point up, above down. Though I would say whoever set this did a poor job.
>half a millenium
More like 300 years max but ok.

Yeah, that's the thing. Despite the reputation of the musical staff, something I pulled out of my ass is better. Why?

>Built off the octatonic/diminished scale, which is a mode of limited transposition. This means there are only a small number of unique displacements of the notes.
>because of this you only have to worry about three key signatures (move 3 steps in either direction and you have the exact same collection of notes labelled the exact same way)
>Major composers like Schoenberg and Hindemith comment on the shortcomings of a diatonic notation system to the needs of modern music.
>The diminished scale is replete in both the classical repertoire from the mid-romantic period onward and jazz repertoire. It has notable structural advantages and is very popular for its versatility in terms of modulation facility.

oh I forgot to post this. When it comes to theorists, Schoenberg and Hindemith are names at the top of the shortlist.

Attached: Even_Hindemith_And_Schoenberg_Agree_With_Me.png (480x198, 54K)

Reading noob here, are the F and the E at the beginning of the bar in OP's pic meant to be played together?

It means they're in love

Yes, they're two separate lines with sonorities occuring simultaneously. This is likely some kind of choral transcription except with terrible typesetting.

How'd play this F and E with the same hand

I'm a brainlet and I don't know what F you guys are supposedly talking about

Attached: gay trash.png (422x377, 247K)

>B

Attached: 1544510304524.png (150x186, 43K)

What about it

that bottom note is an E user

Okay and where the fuck is the F

Did you just assume my clefs

Yes I did

>>Major composers like Schoenberg and Hindemith comment on the shortcomings of a diatonic notation system to the needs of modern music.

don't sully their image with your shit for brains system

it's useless for a couple reasons, that you are oblivious to because of your own ego and stupidity. their comments do not relate to what you've done

>There is no longer a need for musical keys. It's a shorthand, accidentals work just as well, and many, many, modern performers (especially those who actually play new music, which are the target for your shitty "system") prefer to just use accidentals as needed, thus removing the need for key signatures at all, which is what your bullshit is centered around, lmfao
>no room to accommodate for special notation in regards to alterations to pitch, you'd just be borrowing from the current system
>shape based systems have been known to affect the ability to play more dexterous music, and do not teach proper pitch understanding nor promote reading acuity (they have been tried before, and you'd know that if you weren't a mouthbreather)
>your system is relating pitches to a scale, a supremely retarded choice for two reasons: a) musicians cannot be relied on to know their scales, as it burdens their playing and b) it's impractical. notatio nis about the fastest communication of information with the least information possible. you must ignore people like ferneyhough et al., not because their ideas contradict this statement, but because they are more conceptual composers than they are practical, and their ideas are mutually exclusive from the pragmatist aspect of music (to which musical notation is subordinate). your system contains too many steps (learned steps too, not just immediate/obvious steps) to get from view to note

there are many more reasons your system sucks ass, but i'm assuming you know that, and like shitposting that garbage here, knowing that almost no one here is educated, but surprise: you're retarded

No.

>major is not a scale

Okay I think that's enough to summarize your overall state of retardation.

that shitter was talking about pic related

OP the answer to your question is in this post, ignore all else due to retardation:

it means to play all those notes with the right hand. the editor chose not to use ledger lines, probably because it was cheaper (it looks like an early edition, less things to change), or because they are literally stupid, and didn't know what to do, and/or changed the original score because they thought that looked better (putting notes on two clefs but one stem) than just putting ledger lines and keeping the staff separate.

there are few occasions to not split the stems and crossing the staves; this is not one of them.

What the fuck is this shit lmao

Music 2. Move along peabrain.

forgot my pic

Attached: retards itt.jpg (73x133, 3K)

what the fuck are you talking about you fucking retard? empty staffs =/= the C major scale you absolute fucking idiot, music past the 19th century got rid of that tradition you fucking jackass, jesus

like, you know why it's the C collection right? i don't think you do because you're obviously retarded, but just fyi: musical notation was not invented on a keyboard you fucking dipshit

>There is no longer a need for musical keys. It's a shorthand, accidentals work just as well, and many, many, modern performers (especially those who actually play new music, which are the target for your shitty "system") prefer to just use accidentals as needed, thus removing the need for key signatures at all, which is what your bullshit is centered around, lmfao
These kinds of scores are hard to read and highly inefficient for both composer and performer, hence the tendency for virtually every piece written after ~1950 to have its own specialized system of notation (bit hyperbolic, but you get the point). Not to say that a new system of tonality isn't a bit redundant either way, as the dominant paradigms of contemporary music are either that of sonority, performance or reaction.

You're so retarded you don't know that the musical staff is diatonic? Why are you even presuming to reply to me, you uppity retard?

>I know, instead of calling it a scale, I'll call it a "collection". That'll keep him busy.

Yeah its me again but I'm really wondering what kind of firmware you're running on if you think the notes on the musical staff aren't related to a scale.

Took them long enough to come up with a sequel

Music 2: Resurgence

Better than the ridiculous traditional system, but still 3 times more work than a chromatic staff. And notehead color is better used to clarify pitch instead of wasting it on rhythm.