Re: [Finale] different syllabification in different verses

[Mark D Lew]

On Jan 21, 2013, at 10:14 AM, Phil Daley wrote:

> I don't get it at all.
> 
> Where is the alto line?
> 
> What it the bottom clef?  Tenor or bass?  It doesn't have any help for any 
> verse.
> 
> For 4 part hymns, this would be way too confusing to do stuff like that on 
> all 4 parts.

I think we all agree this would not work in hymnbook style.

I was assuming (correctly) that Dennis's situation is a single vocal line.

mdl
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] different syllabification in different verses

[Phil Daley]

Exactly.

It would be way too confusing to do that to 4 part hymns.


At 1/21/2013 01:38 PM, dc wrote:

 >Le 21/01/2013 19:14, Phil Daley écrit :
 >> I don't get it at all.
 >>
 >> Where is the alto line?
 >>
 >> What it the bottom clef?  Tenor or bass?  It doesn't have any help for any
 >> verse.
 >This is a piece for one voice (soprano) and continuo - hence only two
 >parts.
 >


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] different syllabification in different verses

[Phil Daley]

At 1/21/2013 12:05 PM, Mark D Lew wrote:

 >On Jan 21, 2013, at 5:35 AM, dc wrote:
 >
 >> Many thanks to all for the sound advice. I'm still wondering if the
 >> reduction is absolutely necessary or not - i.e. whether it makes things
 >> clearer or not. I have three verses, but never more than two different
 >> configurations. I'm not quite sure either whether most of you are
 >> recommending reduction in the case of flagged 8th-notes with beams in
 >> another layer.
 >>
 >> Would you object to something like this (bearing in mind the old
 >> fashioned beaming style):
 >>
 >> 
 >
 >I still think reducing the downstem alternates is an improvement, but I have
 >no objection to it how it is.
 >
 >The reason I think reducing the notes is an improvement is that even if it
 >does nothing to clarify the actual notes, for singers experienced in the
 >style the very existence of reduced downstem notes immediately communicates
 >the idea "this is alternate scansion for another verse" whereas two voices
 >the same size prompts a brief reaction of "huh? what is going on here?".

I don't get it at all.

Where is the alto line?

What it the bottom clef?  Tenor or bass?  It doesn't have any help for any 
verse.

For 4 part hymns, this would be way too confusing to do stuff like that on 
all 4 parts.

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] different syllabification in different verses

[Mark D Lew]

On Jan 21, 2013, at 5:35 AM, dc wrote:

> Many thanks to all for the sound advice. I'm still wondering if the 
> reduction is absolutely necessary or not - i.e. whether it makes things 
> clearer or not. I have three verses, but never more than two different 
> configurations. I'm not quite sure either whether most of you are 
> recommending reduction in the case of flagged 8th-notes with beams in 
> another layer.
> 
> Would you object to something like this (bearing in mind the old 
> fashioned beaming style):
> 
> 

I still think reducing the downstem alternates is an improvement, but I have no 
objection to it how it is.

The reason I think reducing the notes is an improvement is that even if it does 
nothing to clarify the actual notes, for singers experienced in the style the 
very existence of reduced downstem notes immediately communicates the idea 
"this is alternate scansion for another verse" whereas two voices the same size 
prompts a brief reaction of "huh? what is going on here?".

mdl



___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] different syllabification in different verses

[John Blane]

Lyrics will remain full-sized if you reduce noteheads. They will change if you 
reduce notes. Fortunately, there is now a plugin to do that.

On Jan 20, 2013, at 3:49 PM, Christopher Smith wrote:

> I've dealt with this before and the lyrics get reduced along with the reduced 
> noteheads, plus you have to assign them to a different layer and that causes 
> lyric extension issues. I could try using a fixed font size for the lyrics, 
> but that starts to get touchy, especially since I can't specify fractional 
> point sizes.

John Blane
Blane Music Preparation 
1649 Huntington Ln.
Highland Park, IL 60035
847 579-9900
847 579-9903 fax
www.BlaneMusic.com
j...@blanemusic.com



___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] different syllabification in different verses

[Mark D Lew]

On Jan 20, 2013, at 1:49 PM, Christopher Smith wrote:

> I've dealt with this before and the lyrics get reduced along with the reduced 
> noteheads, plus you have to assign them to a different layer and that causes 
> lyric extension issues. I could try using a fixed font size for the lyrics, 
> but that starts to get touchy, especially since I can't specify fractional 
> point sizes.

Yes, I've had that problem, too.  In my earlier answer I was just describing 
what I feel the page should look like not how to code it. It does sometimes 
require minor kludging if you need the lyrics to align with the cue notes.

I've had the same problem with reduced notes for cadenzas. That's actually been 
more of an issue for me than multiple verses, but it's the same idea.

I wish there were a way to make the lyric % not reflect the note %, and/or 
allow us to choose fractional sizes.

mdl
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] different syllabification in different verses

[Christopher Smith]

I've dealt with this before and the lyrics get reduced along with the reduced 
noteheads, plus you have to assign them to a different layer and that causes 
lyric extension issues. I could try using a fixed font size for the lyrics, but 
that starts to get touchy, especially since I can't specify fractional point 
sizes.

The method that I use (convoluted it may be) is this

Enter ALL the required subdivisions in Layer 1 and assign lyrics to ONLY layer 
1. Jump over unneeded subdivisions as required in the verse you are in.
Wherever there are FEWER subdivisions needed, enter them in Layer 3 and hide 
the Layer 1 notes using O in Speedy. This will NOT hide the lyrics!
Just for show, enter the missing subdivided notes in Layer 2 and resize them. 
Since there are no lyrics assigned to Layer 2, they will not have resized 
lyrics.

Christopher


On Sun Jan 20, at SundayJan 20 4:27 PM, Mark D Lew wrote:

> I'm not sure if this is the exact situation Noel is describing, but if you 
> have a situation where verse 1 has one syllable on a quarter note and verse 2 
> has two syllables on repeated eighth notes on the same pitch, I would NOT 
> write it as two eighths with a dotted tie.  I would write it as a quarter 
> note upstem and then in a second voice have the two eighth notes downstem and 
> reduced.  (Or if it's two syllables in the first verse and one syllable in 
> the second, then the eighth notes are upstem and full size while the quarter 
> note is downstem reduced.)
> 
> I wouldn't say the dotted tie version is "wrong", but it's not how I would do 
> it.
> 
> mdl
> 
> On Jan 20, 2013, at 11:07 AM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
> 
>> Dennis,
>> 
>> Regarding your question,
>>> Suppose you have several verses under the same music, but with small
>>> variants in the syllabification between verses - two notes for one
>>> syllable in one verse but two syllables in another.
>>> 
>>> What's the standard way of indicating this if the beaming follows the
>>> syllabification? Two stems, one with flags, the other with a beam? Or?
>> 
>> I'm not prepared to call it "standard", but my customary method of 
>> dealing with the situation you describe is to prepare the notation for 
>> the greatest number of syllables, and use a dotted slur (or more rarely 
>> a dotted tie) to indicate the notes that are sung together on a single 
>> syllable in some instances. I have seen others use a notation such as s. 
>> 3 (for stanza 3) to indicate  to which stanzas the multiple notes apply, 
>> but I don't personally use this device.
>> 
>> ns
>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Dennis
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> 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

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] different syllabification in different verses

[David H. Bailey]

On 1/20/2013 12:38 PM, dc wrote:
> Suppose you have several verses under the same music, but with small
> variants in the syllabification between verses - two notes for one
> syllable in one verse but two syllables in another.
>
> What's the standard way of indicating this if the beaming follows the
> syllabification? Two stems, one with flags, the other with a beam? Or?
>

I've seen this done with the original verse set up with full-size notes, 
and then for the rhythms of other verses where they differ from the 
first verse cue-size notes have been used.


-- 
David H. Bailey
dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] different syllabification in different verses

[Mark D Lew]

I'm not sure if this is the exact situation Noel is describing, but if you have 
a situation where verse 1 has one syllable on a quarter note and verse 2 has 
two syllables on repeated eighth notes on the same pitch, I would NOT write it 
as two eighths with a dotted tie.  I would write it as a quarter note upstem 
and then in a second voice have the two eighth notes downstem and reduced.  (Or 
if it's two syllables in the first verse and one syllable in the second, then 
the eighth notes are upstem and full size while the quarter note is downstem 
reduced.)

I wouldn't say the dotted tie version is "wrong", but it's not how I would do 
it.

mdl

On Jan 20, 2013, at 11:07 AM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:

> Dennis,
> 
> Regarding your question,
>> Suppose you have several verses under the same music, but with small
>> variants in the syllabification between verses - two notes for one
>> syllable in one verse but two syllables in another.
>> 
>> What's the standard way of indicating this if the beaming follows the
>> syllabification? Two stems, one with flags, the other with a beam? Or?
> 
> I'm not prepared to call it "standard", but my customary method of 
> dealing with the situation you describe is to prepare the notation for 
> the greatest number of syllables, and use a dotted slur (or more rarely 
> a dotted tie) to indicate the notes that are sung together on a single 
> syllable in some instances. I have seen others use a notation such as s. 
> 3 (for stanza 3) to indicate  to which stanzas the multiple notes apply, 
> but I don't personally use this device.
> 
> ns
> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Dennis
>> 
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Finale] different syllabification in different verses

[Mark D Lew]

On Jan 20, 2013, at 9:38 AM, dc wrote:

> Suppose you have several verses under the same music, but with small 
> variants in the syllabification between verses - two notes for one 
> syllable in one verse but two syllables in another.
> 
> What's the standard way of indicating this if the beaming follows the 
> syllabification? Two stems, one with flags, the other with a beam? Or?

My standard practice goes something like this:

- First, I set it up so it looks exactly right for whichever verse is on top.

- Then, if another verse would require the notes to look differently, I'll add 
those notes as on a second layer, as if it's a second instrument on the same 
staff, and shrink them down to 75%.

- Where the only difference is slurring, not notes, then I'll use a dashed slur 
for any slur which exists in one verse but not another (regardless of which is 
which).

- And if all of this makes the page too cluttered, then that's a clue to me 
that I should be writing out the verses separately.

>From your description, it sounds like maybe you use the traditional style 
>where beams are broken for separate syllables. I typically use the modern 
>style where beaming is done as if it were an instrument and doesn't reflect 
>lyric syllabification. I think the general principles would be the same, but 
>the traditional style might necessitate more reduced notes.

This is just a description of my general approach, not a prescriptive rule that 
must be followed.  The larger goal is clarity, so I'd abandon my "rules" if 
ever the situation called for it.

mdl
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] different syllabification in different verses

[Noel Stoutenburg]

Dennis,

Regarding your question,
> Suppose you have several verses under the same music, but with small
> variants in the syllabification between verses - two notes for one
> syllable in one verse but two syllables in another.
>
> What's the standard way of indicating this if the beaming follows the
> syllabification? Two stems, one with flags, the other with a beam? Or?

I'm not prepared to call it "standard", but my customary method of 
dealing with the situation you describe is to prepare the notation for 
the greatest number of syllables, and use a dotted slur (or more rarely 
a dotted tie) to indicate the notes that are sung together on a single 
syllable in some instances. I have seen others use a notation such as s. 
3 (for stanza 3) to indicate  to which stanzas the multiple notes apply, 
but I don't personally use this device.

ns

> Thanks,
>
> Dennis
>
> ___
> 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