In message <v04003a07b9f832fc578c@[128.173.232.136]>, John Howell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Since in all practical ways 4/4 is equivalent to C, and 2/2 is equivalent >to cut time, I would always assume the same relationship applies. After >all, if there is no intended change in note values, there is no point in >changing to 2/2 time! I think there can often be a change in "feel" between music where the composer asks you to think of four beats in a bar and music at the same basic speed where the focus is on the two longer beats. >But it all comes back to making the music LOOK the way you want it to >SOUND. I never want to leave the conductor or the musician in an ambiguous >situation when it can be made clear. In general, as far as the present discussion is concerned, I'm entirely with you there, and I want to see clear and totally non-ambiguous tempo indications. I've just bought a score and parts for a new piece for my orchestra (Wassail by Judith Bailey, published by Goodmusic - a very good source of orchestral music for all levels and at modest prices, including extra copies of all parts available). I was interested to see that there are very clear instructions about speed relationships and actual metronome marks in the score, but only the Italian indications (Allegro, meno mosso etc.) are included in the parts. At the risk of having the parts look a bit more cluttered I would have preferred to see the q=h etc. indications in the parts, even if they are only there to remind the players afterwards what the conductor's laborious but necessary explanation was all about! Patsy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- Patsy Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (formerly [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Conductor, arranger, etc. etc. Newbury College Late Starters' Orchestra Web site: http://www.mooremusic.org.uk N.B. our system rejects emails of more than 300k automatically: warn me beforehand if you want to send one. _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
