Best way to represent 1st/2nd/final endings
I'm rewriting some old-time scores. For those unfamiliar with folk music, these are fairly simple tunes, typically 8 measures in the A part and 8 in the B part, played AABBAABB... until someone ends it. There is often a pickup at the beginning of each section. Here's a good example; this one is actually AABBCC:
http://www.mne.psu.edu/lamancusa/tunes/salsgotmud.pdf
My question is: what is the best way to illustrate the difference, at the very end, between the 2nd ending (when you are going to start over) and the 2nd ending when you are going to stop playing? In the case above, you can't just re-use the first ending because the pickup is different depending on if you are repeating the section or returning to the beginning. So really there are three endings, but I'm trying to avoid writing that:
- ending with pickup for repeating same part
- ending with pickup for going back to A part
- ending with no pickup, usually with a longer ending note
I'm not looking for the most technically correct way, and I don't care about playback. I want suggestions as to what the most intuitive representation is. For instance, I have tried adding the 'ending note' in parentheses in the 2nd ending, which seems like an OK solution but maybe there's a better one.
In many scores I've seen the whole issue is ignored and the fiddler just figures it out. In others, the endings sometimes contain only three beats to provide room for whatever pickup applies (and the beginning repeat is placed before the pickup). These songs are quickly memorized, so the pickups ultimately end up with their section rather than being at the end of a different section. I'm just looking for a way to show it well on paper.
Thanks!
Comments
I’d rather use split measures, a trick which ease the problem, not always suppressing it.
In reply to I’d rather use split by robert leleu
My manual shows nothing called split measures, and searching the forum indicates that everyone's notion of split measures is different. What's yours?
In reply to My manual shows nothing by AntonLargiader
Split measures are a feature of MuseScore 2.0 I believe.
You have to do it manually in 1.1 by defining irregular bars in the Measure properties dialogue.
In reply to Split measures are a feature by ChurchOrganist
Sorry, but this is really circular. The nightly I downloaded had no manual. The online manual makes no mention of split measures. The V2 nightly menu makes no mention of split measures.
I have no idea what you're talking about when you keep telling me to use split measures.
In reply to Sorry, but this is really by AntonLargiader
It's not a simple procedure in v1.1, and the v2.0 manuals are likely very out of date or, as you said, missing. Here's how I would approach it regardless of MS version...
1. Insert a new measure after the one you want to split (go to the next measure after your desired split point and hit INS)
2. Make the new empty measure the desired note length you want by adjusting the actual measure value in the measure properties.
3. Put in the notes you need in the new measure
4. Set the previous measure to the proper length through measure properties. Any extra notes will be deleted.
5. You can even select the bar line for this split measure and hide it so you know when playing that it is part of the next measure.
In reply to Sorry, but this is really by AntonLargiader
Okay, let's go from scratch.
If you are writing a piece with an anacrusis as the first bar, firstly you need to define the actual time value of the anacrusis, which you normally do in the Create New Score dialogue.
Using an anacrusis then has the knock on effect of making section ends and final endings also irregular in that they need to have the time value of the anacrusis deducted from them.
There are two ways of dealing with repeats in this scenario:-
1. You start the repeat after the anacrusis, adding the anacrusis itself to the end of the repeat bar.
2. You start the repeat with the anacrusis, in which case you have to split the repeat bar at the point the anacrusis begins.
See attached score
In the second version you get a split bar at the repeat point.
MuseScore 1.1 will not playback version 2 properly as you cannot set the 1st time anywhere but at the beginning of a complete bar.
As regards clarity I probably prefer version 2 but.......
In reply to Okay, let's go from by ChurchOrganist
In your sample, I found both completely understandable immediately. But I think the first way, with the repeat starting on a barline, is more conventional. (I've just ordered a copy of Gardner Read's book, which I hope is going to be useful for questions like this.)
Not an answer department: though saving trees is an admirable aim, I think we can generally afford to be less mean with space, and write things out in full more than was economical in an age of expensive printing technology.
Brian Chandler
In reply to Okay, let's go from by ChurchOrganist
I see the old-time scores written both ways. The engineer in me prefers the first, but either work.
I suppose the second version does provide a partial solution to my original question. By leaving the pickup with the section that it leads into, you no longer need endings at all on some scores. That makes them nice and modular, as long as the flow is easy enough for the person reading it. As for the example I cited, I suppose I would still want to find a way to show that the last note sustains longer when you end the piece, since the last measure would otherwise be short one beat.
Here's how I scored that same piece myself (second score on this sheet):
http://www.largiader.com/music/multi5.mscz
The smaller half note in parentheses is meant as the 'alternate' end note, only ever played once while the 1st and second endings may be used many times.