I just leafed through some of my piano music: Henle Urtext, Wiener Urtext, Bärenreiter and other renowned European publishers. Two different valued notes sharing a notehead is a common occurence: putting double noteheads in all those places would clutter up the music unnecessarily.
Context is everything. I wouldn't do this on a part where two wind instruments share the same staff, for instance, but pianists are used to music written this way. Michael On 3 Feb 2011, at 22:22, Steve Parker wrote: > The note with stem up needs to be before the note with stem down. > I seem to be in a minority.. but to me the idea of two distinctly valued > notes sharing a notehead is just bad. > As far as I see the only decision to be made is wether you can neatly have > the noteheads touching with the dots close enough > OR > wether to have the down-stemmed note after both the note and the dot. > I think this second version is almost always preferable. > > Steve P. > > On 3 Feb 2011, at 17:10, Noel Stoutenburg wrote: > >> dc wrote: >> >> >>> ... And I >>> think having two noteheads would be more confusing and harder to read. >>> >> >> >> I don't think there's a need for two noteheads in this situation, though if >> the time values were doubled, there obviously would be. However, if one were >> to decide to use two noteheads, I would be inclined to put the note with the >> longer duration, and its dot, after the note with the shorter, so that the >> fact that the rhythms of the two outer voices coincide is visibly indicated >> by the appearance on the page. >> >> ns >> _______________________________________________ >> Finale mailing list >> Finale@shsu.edu >> http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > > _______________________________________________ > Finale mailing list > Finale@shsu.edu > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
