Plastic combs are a "never" as soon as it comes to recordings, they simply make too much noise.
Johannes
This frequently heard canard is based on parts that have been bound too tightly. A properly loose comb binding can be as quiet as any. The Bridge recording of Griffes' _The Kairn of Koridwen_ was made using Kallisti Music Press's comb-bound parts and score, and I defy anyone to hear so much as a whisper of page noise in the result.
-- Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press
The Major Orchestra Librarians Association (MOLA) is not fond of comb binding for scores for a number of other reasons besides noise. Their music preparations guidelines web page is interesting reading, but it doesn't get into specific reasoning for or against certain practices:
http://www.mola-inc.org/musicprepguide.html
Format and Binding
The parts should be prepared within an image area of no less than 8.75 x 11.75" on paper at least 9.5 x 12.5" (A4). These minimum requirements leave a 3/4 inch margin surrounding the image area. Parts should not be reproduced on paper larger than 11 x 14" (B4). Parts larger than 11 x 14" can create just as much of a problem as parts that are too small.
The parts should be saddle stitched or stapled at the spine. Parts prepared on transparencies should be reproduced by diazo process, front and back, not accordion folded. Loose pages must be appropriately taped. The preferred method of binding loose pages is to employ a single strip of special tape to the spine. This is a fast method of binding parts and it insures that the pages lie flat when opened on the stand. The plastic comb binding and accordion fold methods of binding parts are not acceptable.
****************************************************************************************************************
I did hear some of the reasoning when I attended a MOLA conference back in the 90s. The authors of this document cited these reasons against comb binding for orchestral scores:
1) They crack or break more easily than other binding methods.
2) Comb binding is bulky and does not stack very well. (Remember that orchestral librarians tend to live in windowless, airless, closets with hundreds of parts and scores on the verge of avalanching.)
3) Comb binding catches other binding easily.
I also remember the librarians saying that they preferred coil binding to comb binding for large scores, but they also can be bulky when stacked.
Although I agree with many of the orchestral librarians concerns, I am only offering this up to this list for your information.
-Randolph Peters _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
