As one of David's bad musicians I would welcome the subito to warn me of a
sudden change. I don't know what dynamic the winds are playing - what they
call forte in one passage may not be the same in another. Anything which
makes it clearer (and therefore saves expensive rehearsal time) is worth
There are some that come from the school that any subito change is bad
taste, and that new levels need to be gradually moved into. Subito says
no diminuendo/crescendo/accellerando/ritard. Sometimes it's even
observed as such.
That's a strange concept. I would offer as counter-evidence
Christopher Smith wrote:
[snip]
I see no problem with subito mp in a part that hasn't played yet,
because musicians are listening to one another and might be inclined to
follow the dynamic they hear REGARDLESS of what is marked. Dynamics are
not set decibel levels like the Finale playback
Lawrence Yates wrote:
As one of David's bad musicians I would welcome the subito to warn me of a
sudden change. I don't know what dynamic the winds are playing - what they
call forte in one passage may not be the same in another. Anything which
makes it clearer (and therefore saves expensive
Lee Actor wrote:
There are some that come from the school that any subito change is bad
taste, and that new levels need to be gradually moved into. Subito says
no diminuendo/crescendo/accellerando/ritard. Sometimes it's even
observed as such.
That's a strange concept. I would offer as
Hello --
I have an old (1910s - 20s) collection of Scottish violin music,
published in Scotland.
I am entering it into Finale, both to create mandolin tablature and to
ensure useful and proper playback.
I have several questions.
This is the first:
Some, but not all, of the ties have
[Finale 2009]
I have been having problems trying to get Finale to playback pizzicato - arco
changes. Before GPO/VST I had it worked out, but do not seem to be able to
find the right combination of changes to make. I have tried using my old
method (change patch) but this only seems to have
Michael Lawlor wrote:
[Finale 2009]
I have been having problems trying to get Finale to playback pizzicato - arco
changes. Before GPO/VST I had it worked out, but do not seem to be able to
find the right combination of changes to make. I have tried using my old
method (change patch) but
I have respect for Christopher's opinions. They are consistently
thought out and finished, but I disagree in this case. I believe
that consistency in notation is essential in order to get consistent
results. Over-explaining in one instance will train musicians to
expect it in other
At 4:09 AM -0500 9/18/09, Dennis Manasco wrote:
Hello --
I have an old (1910s - 20s) collection of Scottish violin music,
published in Scotland.
I am entering it into Finale, both to create mandolin tablature and
to ensure useful and proper playback.
I have several questions.
This is
Any chance of seeing a scanned example? Is it consistent with
particular rhythms? My hunch is that it's indicating a broken slur.
John Howell wrote:
At 4:09 AM -0500 9/18/09, Dennis Manasco wrote:
Hello --
I have an old (1910s - 20s) collection of Scottish violin music,
published in
It does, however, reflect my own experience, with musicians who have to
add alleged expressivity that I don't intend. Sort of like the everything
has to end with a big ritard school of thought.
ajr
There are some that come from the school that any subito change is bad
taste, and that new
At 3:48 PM +0100 9/18/09, Owain Sutton wrote:
Any chance of seeing a scanned example? Is it consistent with
particular rhythms? My hunch is that it's indicating a broken slur.
Interesting idea: a portato or hooked bowing. Which would normally
be indicated by a slur plus a staccato dot
You could place parentheses around the subito - nice to have it there
since it applies to the ensemble as a whole, not so much to the brass
per se.
Ryan Beard wrote:
Working on a piece for large ensemble. The composer has a passage for woodwinds at forte.
Immediately after the WW finish, the
I disagree. IMO it is absolutely the composer's responsibility to
indicate the pedalling in any harp part, whether by diagram or by the
older method of writing in the pitch names.
As for harpist's preferring to do it themselves, I can only cite the
example of Lejaren Hiller, whose music I
I would suppose different harpists are different. I had one tell me
emphatically that it was cheating for a harpist to use someone else's
diagrams. Since she never played my concerto we never did test it in
practice.
ajr
I disagree. IMO it is absolutely the composer's responsibility to
I disagree. IMO it is absolutely the composer's responsibility to
indicate the pedalling in any harp part, whether by diagram or by the
older method of writing in the pitch names.
As for harpist's preferring to do it themselves, I can only cite the
example of Lejaren Hiller, whose music I
Lee Actor wrote:
I disagree. IMO it is absolutely the composer's responsibility to
indicate the pedalling in any harp part, whether by diagram or by the
older method of writing in the pitch names.
As for harpist's preferring to do it themselves, I can only cite the
example of Lejaren Hiller,
Passing strange. mp subito -- is too much confusion and entire absence of
harp pedals is no confusion at all!
Gerald Berg
From: dhbailey dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com
To: finale@shsu.edu
Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 2:11:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Finale]
That's a really good point Christopher ... I suspect the composer is
perhaps, a little inept at orchestration ... but I could, of course,
be wrong.
Dean
On Sep 18, 2009, at 1:02 PM, Christopher Smith wrote:
Thank you for the kind comments, Chuck (even though we don't agree
on this!) but
On Sep 18, 2009, at 1:02 PM, Christopher Smith wrote:
Thank you for the kind comments, Chuck (even though we don't agree
on this!) but I was thinking about this again (too much time on my
hands?) and the thing that strikes me as odd is that after F
woodwinds, MP brass is not going to
Subito mp sends a mixed message. Who ever talks about something being
suddenly lukewarm? Much better to use p, pp, or even a quieter dynamic
for dramatic contrast. (My comments are general in nature, not based
on any actual knowledge of this piece.)
If the dynamic intent is not clear from
It could be the the subito is correct and the m- is not. First performance?
I seen so many mistakes in published scores that are supposed to be fully
edited. This seems a most perfect error -- it raised a question and will find
an answer. What about wrong notes? Who can really tell -- not
On 18 Sep 2009 at 15:47, Randolph Peters wrote:
In an orchestral setting, mezzo-anything should only be used 1) as a way
of fine-tuning the balance with other instruments or 2) as an in- between
kind of dynamic such as when you go from p cresc. mp cresc. mf cresc. f.
Again, this is just a
Randolph Peters wrote:
Subito mp sends a mixed message. Who ever talks about something being
suddenly lukewarm? Much better to use p, pp, or even a quieter dynamic
for dramatic contrast. (My comments are general in nature, not based on
any actual knowledge of this piece.)
If the dynamic
25 matches
Mail list logo
