|
|
| MakeMusic Forum > Public Forums > Finale - Macintosh - FORUM HAS MOVED! > Mid-measure barlines and independent staves | Forum Quick Jump
|
 |
Peter Thomsen
Registered Member
      
Date Joined Jun 2000
Total Posts : 8331
| Posted 9/20/2016 11:09 PM (GMT -6) |   | I suppose that you by your words {independent, but multiple staves} mean {independent barlines / staggered barlines}, right?
Yes, it is possible.
However, we need more info about the actual layout.
Generally you can get any such layout, but some solutions require advanced workarounds.
Without knowing the actual layout we can not suggest the best solution.
I attach a particular advanced example. It was done in Finale.
Peter
Mac Finale, 2012c, 2014d & 2014.5, Dolet 6.6 plug-in, Mac OS X 10.11.6, iMac Intel Core i7, 2.93 GHz, 16 GB RAM
File Attachment :
Staggered_Barlines.pdf 73KB (application/pdf)This file has been downloaded 406 time(s). | | Back to Top | |
|
Motet
Isorhythmic
Date Joined Dec 2002
Total Posts : 12849
| Posted 9/21/2016 1:00 AM (GMT -6) | | | |
|
Ralph L. Bowers Jr.
Polymathist
Date Joined May 2012
Total Posts : 883
| Posted 9/21/2016 11:35 AM (GMT -6) | | Daz said...
Hi Peter
How did you manage to get that effect?
I've tried and even with independant time sigs, the barlines all appear to line up for a system.
Cheers.
Just ask Peter to drop you the Finale File. It's easily seen within the file.
Or just read through this old topic that has Peter's coments and a file.
forum.makemusic.com/default.aspx?f=5&m=428342
Finale 2010b, 2011b, 2012c, 2014d, 2014.5 TGTools Pro, Patterson plugins, JW plugins (current for each Finale Instalation)
Sibelius 6.2, 7.1.3, 7.5.1, 8.4.2, Write Score Sound Sets, TMT Publisher Bundle Plugins, Bob Zawalich plugins, Dolet 6.6
Print Music 2004, 2010a, 2011a, 2014a
Progression, Progression 2, Progression 3, Notion 4, [Notion 5, (bought but not installed)update finally installed]
Pro Tools 9.5, Reaper
Kontakt 5
GPO4, GPO5, World Instruments
SmartScore X Pro, SmartScore X2 Pro, PhotoScore Ultimate 6 & 7 & 8.04 ( 7 has some utility----best of those available, 8 has some issues that need fixing)
M-Audio "Oxygen 25" Midi input keyboard (recent addition 2014)
Systems (5) // Windows XP Pro (32bit), 2@ Windows 7 Pro, 8.1 Pro, Windows 10 64 bit, 4GB - 16GB RAM
Paper & Pencil
BMus, MM (Musicology) | | Back to Top | |
|
John Ruggero
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2000
Total Posts : 820
| Posted 9/24/2016 9:36 PM (GMT -6) | | You are very welcome, Cathy. If the staves have to be independent of each other, one might have to draw in the final bar line with the line tool for the thin line and a thicker line created for the occasion as a custom line. I tried it and found that it had to be done in two parts, one for each of the staves and joined in the middle. Or one could import the file into Photoshop and draw in the lines that way. But one of the power users may have a much better solution.
If I were faced with this piece, I think that I would group the two staves normally, with or without left bar lines as required, make the meter large enough to make the entire piece one measure, and place all the elements in the score individually, including the numbers in the time signatures, as if hand copying or doing a Schenker graph in Finale. The piece is simple enough that this might not be too time consuming.
Mac mini (OS 10.8.5) with dual monitors, Finale 2014d (Finale 2011 as a backup) with GPO 4
Kurzweil Mark 5 with M-Audio Midisport 2 x 2, Adobe InDesign CS4 SmartScore X Pro, JW Plug-ins
www.cantilenapress.com
The better the composer, the better the notation. | | Back to Top | |
|
Peter Thomsen
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2000
Total Posts : 8331
| Posted 9/25/2016 11:15 AM (GMT -6) | | Hi Cathy,
An exact Finale reproduction of the manuscript is not the ideal solution for performing purposes, since the manuscript is unclear:
- Do the sections in the top staff (marked “slow”) play immediately after each other? Or are there (hidden) rests between the sections?
- Do the sections in the bottom staff play immediately after each other? Or are there (hidden) rests between the sections?
- The first section in the bottom staff is marked “a little quicker”. The bottom staff’s second section does not have a tempo indication.
What is the tempo in the second section? Is it “slow” (as in the top staff)? Or is it “a little quicker” (as in the first section of the bottom staff)?
- What is the meaning of two vertical lines appearing in the staff between two sections?
- What is the meaning of the word “slower” (appearing at two places)?
Slower than what? - Slower than the (simultaneous) tempo in the other staff? - Or slower than the previous tempo in the same staff?
The performer needs answers to such questions.
Not only should the layout be easy to understand, it should also be impossible to misunderstand.
There is an explanatory note at the bottom of the manuscript page:
{The arrows are cues to one hand, to interrupt the other hand & begin counting again from 'one'. ♩ in one hand
does not have to equal ♩ in another.}
Are there other explanatory notes for this particular piece? - perhaps in a preface?
Peter
Mac Finale, 2012c, 2014d & 2014.5, Dolet 6.6 plug-in, Mac OS X 10.11.6, iMac Intel Core i7, 2.93 GHz, 16 GB RAM | | Back to Top | |
|
John Ruggero
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2000
Total Posts : 820
| Posted 9/25/2016 9:52 PM (GMT -6) | | Daz, there are very nice things in your engraving. Here are few comments as requested:
1. Check for a few wrong notes, for example, the second LH note should be C# which really requires a cautionary natural for the next note. Also, the final bar line should run through the staves.
2. It would be better to spread the piece out on 4 complete lines to retain the composer's more spacious layout, and place the composer's comment at the bottom where it might be easier to maintain a constant line height.
3. Even though there are a few needless notational eccentricities, like the system dividers, that could be done away with with good spacing, other unusual features are essential and should be retained. For example, the at times unusual stem direction is designed to allow the arrow tips to intersect note heads rather than stems, which is better visually.
4. To make the two staves look more independent, I would suggest to the composer that the empty space be cut away at the beginning of the first LH staff and the beginning of any others in which the LH has no notes or rests.
5. in response to Peter Thomsen, I think that the meaning of the train tracks as a termination mark is pretty clear, but it might be explained earlier in what appear to be a large set of pieces, and the rather vague tempo indications are intentional and designed to produce a very free performance. The LH "slower" seems to be either misplaced or redundant and is an error that should be corrected by the composer.
Mac mini (OS 10.8.5) with dual monitors, Finale 2014d (Finale 2011 as a backup) with GPO 4
Kurzweil Mark 5 with M-Audio Midisport 2 x 2, Adobe InDesign CS4 SmartScore X Pro, JW Plug-ins
www.cantilenapress.com
The better the composer, the better the notation. | | Back to Top | |
|
Peter Thomsen
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2000
Total Posts : 8331
| Posted 9/26/2016 12:38 AM (GMT -6) | | Cathy Aggett said...
… The two vertical lines mean the sound ends at that moment …
Thanks for the explanation.
I would add that explanation to the performance instructions.
Cathy Aggett said...
… Re your questions to the meaning of 'slower than what', that's always up the performer …
If that is what the composer means, then I would make it clear in the performance instructions that it is up to the performer to decide, whether “slower” means “slower than the tempo in the same staff” or “slower than the tempo in the other staff”.
The same for “quicker”.
Another question:
What is the meaning of a tie that does not go to another note?
Example: the third note in the treble clef staff (= dotted half-note ‘b’). A tie begins on this ‘b’ note, but the tie does not end on another note.
Does the tie perhaps mean that the duration should be extended so that e. g. the dotted half note should last longer than a dotted half?
Could that not just as well be notated with a fermata?
One more question:
I can see two rests that are not hidden.
What is the difference between hidden rests and visible rests?
Peter
Mac Finale, 2012c, 2014d & 2014.5, Dolet 6.6 plug-in, Mac OS X 10.11.6, iMac Intel Core i7, 2.93 GHz, 16 GB RAM | | Back to Top | |
|
Daz
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2006
Total Posts : 1723
| Posted 9/26/2016 8:32 AM (GMT -6) | | Hi John
John Ruggero said...
Daz, there are very nice things in your engraving. Here are few comments as requested:
1. Check for a few wrong notes, for example, the second LH note should be C# which really requires a cautionary natural for the next note.
Well that's embarrassing. I've gone through and (I hope) found the incorrect notes.
I wondered the cautionary myself, but later in the score the composer has specifically placed one (albeit on the same ledger line). I have my own suspicions as to the purpose of this score, so I decided to let sleeping accidentals lie.
John Ruggero said...
Also, the final bar line should run through the staves.
Again, a case of not properly checking work. But it's now fixed
John Ruggero said...
2. It would be better to spread the piece out on 4 complete lines to retain the composer's more spacious layout, and place the composer's comment at the bottom where it might be easier to maintain a constant line height.
Done!
John Ruggero said...
3. Even though there are a few needless notational eccentricities, like the system dividers, that could be done away with with good spacing, other unusual features are essential and should be retained. For example, the at times unusual stem direction is designed to allow the arrow tips to intersect note heads rather than stems, which is better visually.
Done!
John Ruggero said...
4. To make the two staves look more independent, I would suggest to the composer that the empty space be cut away at the beginning of the first LH staff and the beginning of any others in which the LH has no notes or rests.
There I must (respectfully) disagree. While the score and system appear to be independent, I believe that they are not. The notes actually make that clear.
I actually think that this is a training exercise to teach pupils to develop independent 'brains' in their left and right hands (maybe Cathy can correct me here)
In any event, thank you for you feedback John. I've redone my attempt and post it here.
This is actually my first real attempt to try and get a score to look good. I'm usually more concerned in getting the music in there and fiddling with how it sounds rather than how it looks.
This is a great challenge. It's small, and simple enough (comparitively) to allow me to find ways of getting the idea down on paper, without overwhelming me with the complexity/bulk of some of the orcehstral scores that I usually play with.
I hope, Cathy, that you don't mind that I've hijacked this piece (and thread) for my own education.
Cheers...
Daz. :o)
------------------------
Finale 2006-2011, Finale 25 - Win7 64 bit
Core2 Duo i7-4790, 16Gb Ram, Soundblaster ZPost Edited (Daz) : 9/26/2016 9:55:48 AM (GMT-5)
File Attachment :
Century_#88_Cues_My_Attempt_2.pdf 23KB (application/pdf)This file has been downloaded 280 time(s).
File Attachment :
Century_#88_Cues_My_Attempt_2.musx 95KB (application/octet-stream)This file has been downloaded 256 time(s). | | Back to Top | |
| 30 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Tuesday, December 19, 2023 8:06 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 403,820 posts in 58,165 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2023 |
|
|