Here's from my brother (classically trained orchestra musician and electronic music composer):
I checked the cd version I have in cubase with a click track playing the accents: it's 13/8 (3+3+3+2+2), 194 bpm. You can hear the click being stable throughout, without any adjustments (ok, it might be .0x off due to slightly different midi timing from Cubase and his gear) - if this weren't the tempo/meter, it would drift a lot.
The reason for the confusion is probably the sloppy/free live playing in some of the lines. I imagine he had a click track or some quantised line running (like the opening percussion), and played the rest live (even the percussion/string hits in the middle, that sound a bit rushed and sloppy).
I think the whole 8ths/16ths etc about how the score should be are irrelevant in electronic music, unless you were to transcribe it for someone to play.
I can't agree with that. 3+3+3+2+2 means that the first four notes are all evenly spaced. Tap the accent with your hand. The fourth note is delayed. The pattern is actually 3+3+4+2+2. 7/8.
And the tempo is definitely faster than 194 - it's closer to 212. Are you sure your brother listened to the right track?
Actually, had another listen (and put it into a DAW). We're both wrong (but I'm more wrong). It's closer to 3+3+3.1+2+2.
The groupings of 2 are delayed, but not by a full 16th note.
So it's neither straight 7/8 nor straight 13/16, but a bit in between. Definitely much closer to the 13/16 others are saying, but with enough of a hesitation that a 16th note grid doesn't actually line up. 13.1/16?
He checked again. If we're being pedantic, 13/8 at 194.086 bpm is more accurate once you line up the more percussive elements in the middle of the track with a downbeat in the sequencer properly.
The actual tempo was probably 194 bpm, and the slight deviation has something to do with equipment or the transfer (tape speed, midi timing, whatever). Also consider the unquantised playing, slower attack times in some sounds, his gear etc. I wouldn't be surprised if a contemporary classical composer thought "You know what, no one's done a 13.1/16 piece - I bet it would be amazing. Such inspiration. Much genius", but I don't think that applies here. No reason to complicate things.
He made an mp3 with a ride cymbal doing the opening pattern throughout the track; 13/8 no tempo alterations, at 194.086 bpm, and it's pretty much spot on.
I checked the cd version I have in cubase with a click track playing the accents: it's 13/8 (3+3+3+2+2), 194 bpm. You can hear the click being stable throughout, without any adjustments (ok, it might be .0x off due to slightly different midi timing from Cubase and his gear) - if this weren't the tempo/meter, it would drift a lot.
The reason for the confusion is probably the sloppy/free live playing in some of the lines. I imagine he had a click track or some quantised line running (like the opening percussion), and played the rest live (even the percussion/string hits in the middle, that sound a bit rushed and sloppy).
I think the whole 8ths/16ths etc about how the score should be are irrelevant in electronic music, unless you were to transcribe it for someone to play.