Percusiion set up on MuseScore (part deux)
I've added a few pdfs so that my intention might be more clear this time.
PDF A shows the first page of the score with the ONE percussionist's parts taking up so much space. This is remedied with "hide empty staves" in future pages (PDF B), but it does not allow for the desired economy - I would like to have put the instruments on a five-stave set up (as in a player's part, which would provide him/her clarity), but the "drum set" does not allow for the instruments I wanted, such as "concert" bass drums and snare.
Or am I mistaken?
In PDF C and B you see a situation where I would like to have had the instruments have their stems tied to mutual beams (as in player's part.)
Is this possible? (I should mention that a consideration at this time are the sounds I wanted for PLAYBACK.) As it is now, the scores are clear enough. though not as economical as could be.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| I._Jeu_de_Sons- perc question A.pdf | 35.38 KB |
| I._Jeu_de_Sons- perc question B.pdf | 25.03 KB |
| I._Jeu_de_Sons- perc question C.pdf | 24.79 KB |
Comments
that's...p-e-r-c-u-s-s-i-o-n Percussion!
See the Handbook under Drum notation; you'll note there is a whole section on how to customize drumset definitions. That's how you get a five-line staff to show the specific drums you want. Note also there is an instrument you can add that listed simply as "Percussion" that is already set up to use a five-line staff and it includes concert bass drum, concert snare, etc. So it might be already set up exactly how you want, or at msot will require only slight tweaking.
Not understanding what you mean about beams in B & C. I don't see any places in the percussion parts there where you would normally want beams. Unless maybe you mean you want to beam the sixteenths over rests. That works for percussion exactly the same as for any other instrument: click a rest, double-click "beam middle" in the Beam Properties palette.
In reply to See the Handbook under Drum… by Marc Sabatella
Yes. Thank you. I had visited that page at an earlier time, but now that I've discovered "all instruments" I can facilitate that change. Good!
As for the beams, I've enclosed a PDF of two percussion parts on adjacent lines for ONE player. Could the stems of each be tied to the same beams? (as they would be on the player's part.)
In reply to Yes. Thank you. I had… by penne vodka
Well, this will happen automatically of course if you combine those two into a single "percussion" instrument, and I highly recommend doing that. I can't say I've seen scores organized the way you seem to be describing, with separate staves for separate instruments but nonetheless beamed as if they were one part. Nevertheless, you can make that happen in MuseScore if you define those as two staves of the same instrument (for which you would need to create an appropriate drumset definition containing both sets of notes / sounds). You would then be able to use the same cross-staff notation feature that is primarily used for piano music.
Click below for my Quick Answer on how to enter cross-staff notation:
Enter Cross-Staff Notation
https://masteringmusescore.com/quick-answers/enter-cross-staff-notation
In reply to Well, this will happen… by Marc Sabatella
Thanks, Marc,
One of the things I have learned to do is cross staff notation for piano. No problem here.
As for "separate instruments but nonetheless beamed as if they were one part." This is usually the case for parts, but I've seen such in scores of contemporary music, beginning with the notable examples of Varese's percussion writing. However...
I did understand your ultimate suggestion and may take it up. I find what I am doing simpler and clear (pdf example below) and I sincerely ask your opinion on this:
While a percussionist may be familiar with what instrument is on what line of a five-line staff in his/her part, I feel it is easier for a reader or conductor to follow the individual line which appear as needed (we are hiding empty staves) in a score.
Another reason I am reticent to change (that is, redo with your drumset modification ) is that I am in movement 3/6, with over 700 bars of fairly complicated score completed and I DO NOT want to start over...
...of course, you may happily tell me I won't have to start over.
What say you?
In reply to Thanks, Marc,… by penne vodka
FWIW, as a conductor myself, hiring empty staves is the surest way to make it harder to follow what is happening. If the goal is ease of reading, then it's best for all staves to stay in the same position from page to page. Otherwise, I am forced to read staff labels to figure out which line matches with which every time I turn the page. Your example is quite awkward to me, as it took a while to realize that the instrument below the trombone staff kept changing. The only benefit to this would be is hiding the empty staves allows for either a lot fewer page turns or allows for a significantly larger staff size, and even then it's questionable to me. Hiding empty staves is better suited for "study" scores than for ones to be used in actual performance. On the other hand, while I am fairly confident this view is typical, I know it is not universal, and there are conductors who prefer "condensed" scores even for performance.
As for needing to start over, you shouldn't. You should be able to merge the contents of your staves using something like Edit / Tools / Implode, or perhaps copy & paste with multiple voices. Details will depend on the specifics of how you set things up.
In reply to FWIW, as a conductor myself,… by Marc Sabatella
That was a fair assessment. I know what you mean about "study scores"....and disappearing/returning staves...come to think of it, I'm with you.
I was an awful rehearsal conductor years ago with university orchestra. Perhaps I am projecting my own incompetence.
I've just completed mvmt. III. I may try your suggested way on mvmt. IV. If not, I will most likely make the changes at a future time when I am more confident and build up my MuseScore facility, at which point I know I can count on the helpful folks here, like you have been.
Thanks again.