John Howell wrote:
At 12:48 PM -0400 8/16/06, Raymond Horton wrote:
Yes, but all of those should be enharmonically changed in both the
score and the parts.
I would ordinarily agree, but I'm not sure it's true in this case. (Or
that it isn't!!)
In the case of parts, you are changing the tablature by using
enharmonic equivalents and giving it precedence over proper chord
spelling. In the case of the score, the conductor needs to be able to
read the chords, which should be spelled properly. Two separate
problems, two different solutions.
Opinions, anyone? (Well of COURSE! We can't even agree on whether
concert or transposed scores are better!!!)
John
I disagree with your longer paragraph 100 %. You never want to confuse
the conductor, who can figure out homonyms on the score easier than
he/she can figure out disparities between score and parts. The
conductor needs to know exactly what is in the parts, except for those
rare exceptions we mentioned earlier. Enharmonic respelling has been
very common in orchestral scores for many, many years, especially in
horn parts, instruments in Eb, etc.. Even clef differences between
score and parts, which are quite common, can cause confusion in
rehearsal.
Raymond Horton
Bass Trombonist, occasional composer and arranger,
Louisville Orchestra
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
