On 12/18/2009 8:09 AM, Christopher Smith wrote:
Aaron, may I ask, then, are you happy with microscopic rehearsal letters and tempo changes in your scores? Once the score sizing gets down to 60% or so (not at all unusual in an orchestra score) then all these items are illegible.
For the type of thing I do (generally chamber orchestra scores at 65% on 8.5x11), it works out fine. For larger scores, it's a bit of a moot point. I wouldn't conduct from anything much smaller than 65%, so if I have more staves I would blow it up onto larger paper at a larger percentage. I think I might find that fixed sizes have the opposite problem: if they're the right size for the parts, then the proportion relative to the music in the score would be too great. So I can see the argument for something else which has been discussed, the option to specify different sizes for expressions in score and parts (either fixed or proportional).
I am okay with fixed sizes for tempo marks and rehearsal letters, because there is actually an advantage to having these items be grotesquely large in the score compared with the staff height, but
From a conductor's perspective, I disagree. I would rather have everything on the page be at an appropriately scaled size. By the time I get to rehearsal, I'm not really reading tempo marks and such, because I know how the piece goes, and anything I need I will have marked in my favorite 6B pencil. And if I have to lean in a bit to verify a rehearsal letter when we're starting up, I don't mind.
I imagine that things might be different in the recording world, where a conductor might be leading a group through a commercial or something that he'd gotten just the day before. In that case, very large markings might help compensate for the lack of preparation time.
Aaron. _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
