At 12:26 AM +0100 2/12/03, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
On 12.02.2003 0:15 Uhr, Éric Dussault wroteTwo sections in the piece, the second one repeated. From the first to the second section is a tied note. Should the tie a) cross the double repeat bar as though it was a normal barline, b) consist of two tie ends, one before the repeat bar line, one after, c) be dotted over the repeat bar line? JohannesSo the second repeated section is not starting on a new staff system. Do I understand it well?Yep.I don't see why you shouldn't use a) from my understanding of your problem. Unless there is something more that I can't see, it looks fine to me.Yes, the only thing that bothers me is that when coming back for the repeat, the note is no longer a tied to note (but still has that tie to it). Also, the tie goes right through the repeat bar line, does that bother anyone? (This is for publication, and I can't find any rules for such situations). Johannes
I don't know of a rule to this, but the fact that the note is NOT tied on the repeat bothers me. I use dotted slurs for when there is a melisma in one verse of lyrics but not the other, so I would probably do something like this:
1) For the last note of the first section, a solid tie, ending with a square end at the barline, NOT extending to the first note of the second section.
2) On the right-hand side of the barline, continue the slur with a dotted slur, in the same arc as the first slur. This would adequately show that the slur is no good on the repeat, but is on the first time. The last note of the first section needs a solid slur.
Crappy graphic representation of what I mean:
O______|_ _ _ _O
|
notehead bar notehead
--
Christopher
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
