Metric Signs

[kphoger]

In fact, writing a simple glissando would imply things about the run of notes that you don't actually intend to communicate to the performer

There is also a difference between notating all the notes between the first and last note of a run vs a glissando for wind instruments. Usually a gliss will be it doesn't matter what notes in between are hit but make it as smooth as possible, smeared if possible. Notated out, it's not expected each note will be hit, but they are typically part of a specific scale, so the ones out of that scale should be avoided but the first and last notes are the important ones to hit with the ones in between being filler.

That's actually what I had in mind when I wrote that.  If any of the notes in between aren't part of that 'specific scale', then you'll have to notate all of them.  Same if any extras are included or any usual ones are omitted.

Then again, writing a trombone part with anything faster than eighth notes is likely to make the trombonist want to lose control of the slide, and it will go flying across the room and hit you in the teeth with their slide, so maybe don't do that either.

Edited for accuracy.

[Brandon]

With the way things have been going recently in Canada, should some of those western provinces eventually gain independence and then join the USA . . .

With the way things have been going in America, I think it's more likely that it will have fewer states rather than more in the future.

Secession is illegal in the US, and has been since, de facto, 1865, and de jure since 1869 (and if you include the Articles of Confederation, then since 1781).  So, no, it's not likely at all.  Texas v. White: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._White

By contrast, Canada has an act that allows for session, the Clarity Act: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarity_Act

[LilianaUwU]

By contrast, Canada has an act that allows for session, the Clarity Act: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarity_Act

And yet, when Québec tried, Canada meddled in, and rigged, the referendum to make sure we remained in Canada.

[Scott5114]

Secession is illegal in the US, and has been since, de facto, 1865, and de jure since 1869 (and if you include the Articles of Confederation, then since 1781).  So, no, it's not likely at all.

What the laws of the United States say only matters if the government of the United States remains a going concern. Or if the government of the United States remains able and willing to enforce them.

I'm not convinced all of those will remain true. (I'm not convinced they won't remain true, either, mind you.)

I also don't see any compelling reason any territory that is not currently part of the United States would want to become so. It would seem to create more problems for that territory than it would solve.

[hotdogPi]

A state can leave with consent of the state and a simple majority of the US House and Senate.

[Scott5114]

A state can leave with consent of the state and a simple majority of the US House and Senate.

I mean, not according to the Supreme Court Texas v. White.

But the Supreme Court of 2025 just kind of makes shit up as they go, so who knows if that even applies anymore.

[Brandon]

A state can leave with consent of the state and a simple majority of the US House and Senate.

That's for making a new state out of a current state.  I'd suggest looking again at Texas v. White.

[vdeane]

With the way things have been going recently in Canada, should some of those western provinces eventually gain independence and then join the USA . . .

With the way things have been going in America, I think it's more likely that it will have fewer states rather than more in the future.

Secession is illegal in the US, and has been since, de facto, 1865, and de jure since 1869 (and if you include the Articles of Confederation, then since 1781).  So, no, it's not likely at all.  Texas v. White: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._White

By contrast, Canada has an act that allows for session, the Clarity Act: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarity_Act

It was also illegal for the 13 colonies to secede from Great Britain.  That didn't stop it from happening.  And quite frankly, the moral and cultural gulf between the sides of the Culture Ware are so great that I don't see how the whole thing can be resolved without a national divorce (assuming one side doesn't just shove the other out of society).

[CtrlAltDel]

Secession is illegal in the US, and has been since, de facto, 1865, and de jure since 1869 (and if you include the Articles of Confederation, then since 1781).  So, no, it's not likely at all.  Texas v. White: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._White

Texas v. White specifically mentions that the consent of the states, whatever form that might entail, affords a legal means of secession. It's really only unilateral secession that's a no-no.

The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration, or revocation, except through revolution, or through consent of the States.