Owain Sutton wrote:
Andrew Stiller wrote:
There is another (and IMO superior) way to handle this kind of situation however, and that is to number each performed measure rather than each written one. In that method, if the first eight measures are repeated, the first measure after the repeat is m. 17, not m. 9. This is an admittedly rare approach, but I have seen it in published material more than a few times.
This is what I would use, if there were any possible conflicts regarding first/second-time endings etc. Anything that has the potential to cause confusion in rehearsal must surely be considered a Bad Thing?
Given that professional musicians are humans, they can always find something to cause confusion.
Numbering the measure after the 1st, 2nd endings at the end of an 8-bar phrase as measure 17, will have some musicians, when the conductor says "Let's start at measure 21" counting 13 measure past the endings, while others will start in the 5th measure after the endings.
There is nothing that is so fool-proof as a group of professionals can't make a total sham of it.
-- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
