On 22 Feb 2006 at 9:28, Cecil Rigby wrote: > If it's a scholarly edition in which you want credit for the edits > then you could include the brackets (ugh!). An alternative is to > asterisk them and include a note, which is much less obtrusive. The > small addition to the marks' footprints probably wouldn't have a > bearing on whatever regular rules for placement you use.
If Kim is still working on the same repertory he's been doing so much work in, it's a scholarly edition of Baroque music (which looks like that's what's in his illustration). Brackets are *not* obtrusive at all. And it's important to distinguish editorial dynamics so that an interpreter can ignore them, if she chooses. They are editorial suggestions and someone using an edition with brackets can immediately see what can be omitted or altered. A footnote makes that substantially harder to do. Note also that many critical editions don't use brackets, but use non- italic for original dynamics and italic for editorial additions. The problem is that it's hard to remember which is which if you're not careful. One could use italic for original dynamics using the Finale fonts, and create non-italic dynamics for the editorial additions without brackets, but I find that will cause them to not be noticed as editorial, and would just look funny to many people, who'd wonder why there are dynamics in two different fonts. Brackets make the meaning completely clear, with no need for footnotes or explanation. Tell me that this: http://www.dfenton.com/Midi/Foerster10_1/Foerster10_1_019.png is cluttered, in regard to dynamics. Certainly, I would agree that the editorial strokes are cluttered, and haven't decided what I'm going to do for the final edition (I may just change it so there's an opening bracket on the first of a run of them and a closing editorial bracket on the last; but I like having only a single definition for the editorial stroke, and that would mean creating 2 different ones, or using the non-editorial stroke and then not knowing except by looking at context, which of the strokes is editorial; the advantage of having a separate definition is that you can change them all at once to make them obvious, and do things like replace them in parts with a standard articulation, if you want), but I think the brackets can be made to work just fine, at least for dynamics, if not for articulations that are repeated. -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
