Volta without repeat?
I've just come across an odd situation, and I wonder what the correct way to handle it is. Within a repeated section, there is a subsection that should be played one way the first time, another way the second time. However the material in question is in the middle of the repeated section, and not at the end -- so normal first/second ending voltas don't help.
I realized that I could write something like the following, which sort of makes sense to me although I've never seen it. (This example just shows the structure; the actual material is much longer.) Doing this doesn't play back properly in MS, of course; but I don't care about that, I just want to write something that is notationally correct.
I could use an ossia, but since this isn't optional, it isn't really the right solution. Have I forgotten a normal bit of notation usage that applies in this case? I do realize I can write the whole thing out twice, but that will result in much duplication that seems unnecessary.
Thanks if anybody can point me in the right direction.
Comments
The repeat barline you have at the end must be at the end of measure 3
In reply to The repeat barline you have by Raymond Wicquart
Thanks, but no, I don't want to repeat after measure three. I want the material under volta 1 to be played the first time through, the material under volta 2 to be played the second time. I don't want to repeat after the first volta but continue with the rest of the section. I realize this is not how voltas are used, I'm trying to show musically what I want to happen and asking how this could be notated.
In reply to Thanks, but no, I don't want by spinality
To clarify, this is the result I want from the snippet above.
The red sections are the material under the first and second "voltas" though I realize that without using them as first and second endings this is abnormal.
And again, this is just a schematic representation. The respective sections are much longer and more complex.
In reply to To clarify, this is the by spinality
And this is exactly how this is written correctly. Sometimes there are no shortcuts and you need to go uphill along the serpentines the street makes.
The good news is that with Musescore you can use copy/paste to save time on the typesetting though you can't save paper. In the old days composers and copyists had to write all repeated sections twice in these sort of circumstances.
In reply to And this is exactly how this by azumbrunn
Thanks. That is what I expected, but I've been surprised to find some variant or unusual usage. Of course I've seen lots of jazz charts with portions marked "last repeat only" or "solos only" or whatever, and these are perfectly understandable. So I guess if I really need to do this, I can rely on textual annotation to explain the different sections and how they fit together.
I still sort of like the voltas without repeats though, as in my first example. Maybe I'll just do that and confuse everybody. :)
In reply to Thanks. That is what I by spinality
Since they are longer sections, dc or ds al coda might make it fewer measures.
In reply to To clarify, this is the by spinality
Maybe this :
![Répétitions_bizarres.png]( "Répétitions_bizarres.png")
Répétitions bizarres.mscz
In reply to Maybe this : by [DELETED] 16875981
Thanks for the coda suggestions. Yes, I considered this approach. In this case, though, it really wouldn't save very much paper, and the result would be rather complex. At any rate, I was more interested in the general question of whether there was some method for dealing with these situations that I wasn't familiar with. Apparently, the answer is 'no.' Our conventions do a good job with variant endings...but evidently for some reason variant middles have never attracted anybody's attention.
To clarify, the piece that prompted my question is essentially played twice, plus a coda; but right in the middle of the repeated structure there are a few variant measures -- on the repeat, there is a short variant melody and a short added subsection. If I construct a short version (by marking the variants as 'ossia', by using textual notation, or by using my "nonstandard non-repeating volta" notation) I get a three page score. A correct score, either duplicating the material or using a DS, will give me 5-6 pages. Oh well.
I seem to recall seeing some Villa-Lobos scores that had some clever way of dealing with this...but if so, presumably that was a nonstandard engraving approach.
In reply to Thanks, but no, I don't want by spinality
OK, understand !! But MuseScore can't do that
In reply to OK, understand !! But by Raymond Wicquart
Looks like Mire's volta should not be there.
In reply to OK, understand !! But by Raymond Wicquart
Actually MuseScore *can* do that, as you could see in my example LOL, but it's not correct. I hope Marc or somebody else doesn't decide to prevent this, in case I find that nonstandard notation useful.