Thanks, Johannes. I don't like it, either, but this client does a great
many things which I question the rationality of. It is easier just to go
along and not put my name on the sheet. I think this will be the last work
I accept.
Crystal Premo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Johannes Gebauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Finale] Measure numbers in repeats
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:25:26 +0100
John Howell wrote:
How to number 2nd endings is an editorial choice. I've seen it done in
different ways, and done it different ways myself. I'll often take the
lazy way out and number the first ending bar as "8" and the 2nd ending bar
as "9," as long as the score and parts are all exactly the same.
This kind of practice is actually seen as wrong by all major publishers. It
is possible that in your special case it doesn't cause any grief, but I
strongly advise against doing it this way. It will add almost indefinite
complications to rehearsals as soon as several editions of the same piece
exist.
The correct way to number first and second endings is to number the first
bar of the first and second ending the same.
There are rare cases where the whole repeat is renumbered in brackets. A
typical example is when one part is added or changed the second time round.
As far as I know this practice is also prefered in film scores, as it makes
editing the sound track easier.
Johannes
--
http://www.musikmanufaktur.com
http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
