On 30 Nov 2005 at 13:07, Andrew Stiller wrote: > The special reductions I want are to indicate that the composer > notated two 8th notes (e.g.) but they should have been 16ths, or that > he failed to include a required augmentation dot. These are both very > common MS errors. > > In the first case, the 8th note beam is correct, but the second beam > is editorial, and in the second case the notehead is correct, but the > dot is editorial. > > Especially for big scores such as symphonies, I try to keep the > critical report as compact as possible, and I do this by including as > much editorial info as possible in the body of the score itself. If I > don't have, say, a thin subsidiary beam, then I have to critically > report the altered note values which that beam represents.
I think that's absolutely the best approach. I do this kind of thing with ossia measures, though for rhythm of a single note, I may use a simple note expression (I use the note expression to editorially suggest double dotting, for instance). Perhaps you don't really have enough room between staves for this in a full score, though. -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
