Kim:
I do not disagree with any of what David Fenton wrote, at least in most
cases, however I know from my own work that there are exceptions to it.
Several years back, I did some work for a publisher who was
contemplating republishing some public domain marches. What he had were
sets of parts, with no score, and the proposed republications were to
feature updated parts, and the creation of a full score. What I found in
working with these instrumental parts (none of which, by the way, had
measure numbers in the original versions) were that repeat patterns
among the parts did not match. Where one part might repeat one strain,
and play the next strain once through, a different part played the first
strain once through, and repeated the second. If you counted the
measures on some parts, the apparent number was different from others,
though if one handled all the repeats, everything was the same length.
Since these exercises, my view has modified to be that measure numbers
mark reference points, and my main consideration is that the same number
should appear on each part at the same place in a given composition,
that is, it should be clear if a reference is made to measure 56,
exactly where that is in each part.
ns
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
