> >     |\
> > ----|-|----O------------|----#--O------------|-------------------------
> >     | /   |         |   |      |        |    |           |         |
> > --- |/----|---------|---|------|--------|----|-----------|---------|---
> >    /|     |         |   |      |O       |    |           |         |
> > - /-|- ---|---------|---|------|--------|----|-----------|---------|---
> >  | /| \   |         |   |      |        |    |           |         |
> > --\ | /---|---------|---|------|--------|----|-----------|---------|---
> >    -|-             O    |      |O      O     |     #    O         O
> > ----|-------------------|------|---------\---|---------/---------------
> >  * -                           |^          \----------/
> >                                | \
> >                                   \
> >                                    \
> >                                    f or f# ???

I'd simply call this "bad notation". If you have any sympathy for the
musicians  reading  it,  you won't do this sort of thing.  A sensible
editor would point this out, and suggest advisory accidentals.   And,
rather  than  guessing, I'd expect an editor to ask whether the Fs in
the 2nd measure should be sharp or natural, and suggest an accidental
in either case.


    |\
> ----|-|----O------------|----#--O------------|-------------------------
>     | /   |         |   |      |        |    |           |         |
> --- |/----|---------|---|------|--------|----|-----------|---------|---
>    /|     |         |   |      |        |    |           |         |
> - /-|- ---|---------|---|------|--------|----|-----------|---------|---
>  | /| \   |         |   |      |        |    |           |         |
> --\ | /---|---------|---|------|--------|----|-----------|---------|---
>    -|-             O    |           #  O     |     #    O         O
> ----|-------------------|----------------\---|---------/---------------
>  * -                                  ^    \-------^--/
>                                       |            |
> I was also told even if there is an f# here the    # here is unusual (wrong ?).
> I know this is a problem (error ?) but I didn't fix it because most
> musical typesetters delete the superfluous #. And it is easier to handle.

Again, leaving out the sharps is at least "poor notation".  This is a
good  example  of  where  you  want advisory accidentals, so that the
musicians don't have to read your mind in absentia.  If a  typesetter
removed  the  sharps,  especially the first, I'd try to find a better
typesetter.

It is often a good idea to include a few extra accidentals when there
is  a  chance  that  musicians  won't  understand  what rules you are
following. Catching poor notation like this is one of the reasons for
rehearsals,  and  musicians  routinely write in corrections when they
stumble across this sort of poor or misleading notation.

To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html

Reply via email to