suggestion for clusters

[Vaughan]

Does anyone have a suggestion for notating these piano clusters in an easy-to-read way but which doesn't require endless messing around with custom stems? I tried notating the first cluster (from bottom to top) as E#,F#,G,Ab,Bb but I'm not sure that's more readable than what the composer wrote and this kind of enharmonisation won't be desirable for all the clusters, as having to use double sharps or double flats doesn't help the readability. Using custom stems will also be made more difficult by the duplets and cross-staff beaming.

clusters.jpg (64.98 KiB) Viewed 6879 times

[N Grossingink]

I don't do stuff like this, so don't have a repertoire of solutions. One thought however.

I would arrange the notes, stemless and beamless, and the tuplet brackets and/or numbers. For the stems, I'd use a single line Shape Expression so that they could be entered with Metatools (to be individually adjustable) and so that they can be note attached (so the whole stem set will remain together and individual stems won't wander around, at least in theory). Put it under the microscope by zooming in and go to it.

N.

[David Ward]

If these were all straight five finger chromatic clusters, you might write just the top and bottom note of each cluster in the traditional way and add a sign (shape) which is described in a preliminary text note to the piece as meaning such a cluster with the two written notes as the top and bottom. However, it seems some of these clusters are complicated by including a whole tone rather than semitone at one end, so I doubt that could work…

[Peter Thomsen]

This is one of the cases where it might be relevant to invent some sort of new notation.

Here is an idea:
Use a vertical bar after the dyad.
You will have to add an explanation that it means “fill the interval chromatically”.
And perhaps also write an example out so that you explain the idea both verbally and graphically.

[Vaughan]

Thanks to all of you for giving this some thought. In the final analysis, I think Peter Thomsen's idea combines readability and conciseness with attractiveness. Let's hope the composer agrees!

[Vaughan]

What do you think of this?

clusters.jpg (193.04 KiB) Viewed 6802 times

[motet]

It's a great idea, but personally I'd want the symbol to be a little more prominent. How about a square bracket (]), or does that have another musical meaning?

[Peter Thomsen]

What do you think of this? …

1) Looks fine to me.
I would add the word ‘two’:

The thick vertical line denotes a chromatic cluster between those two notes.

It might be a good idea to explain the meaning both verbally and graphically:

Clusters-Xpl.jpg (6.32 KiB) Viewed 6787 times

2) You have notated the clusters as duplet 8ths.
It might be better with duplet quarters (as in the composer’s manuscript), considering that the clusters have the double value of the quadruplet 8ths in the top staff (compare with the duplet quarters in my previous post).


3) It is quite common to indicate a cluster via a thick vertical line - and the line could be even thicker than in these examples.
On The Other Hand - a square vertical bracket (= ]) usually indicates that the notes are played by the same hand or finger.

[David Ward]

Peter, I think your suggestions cover the case perfectly - one hopes Vaughan's composer will agree.

[Vaughan]

Thanks again for the responses. I have another question and I know this has been discussed in the old forum at great length. How would you notate four equal values in one beat in a compound meter like 6/8? This particular composer notates them as 8th quadruplets, which is what Finale does by default, but she also avoids using duplets, preferring to write them as dotted 8ths, so why not write the quadruplets as dotted 16ths, as well? In that case, I should also write those clusters as dotted 8ths, which will look a bit strange. On the other hand, I could also write the quadruplets as 16ths, in which case I should write those clusters as quarter duplets. I checked Gould about this and she said that all three possibilities are acceptable and can be found in existing music. What do you people think?

[Peter Thomsen]

Vaughan,

1) I agree with Gould:
All three possibilities are acceptable and can be found in existing music.

2) The less black you have on the page (without losing any information), the better.
By using notation with tuplets - instead of dotted notes - you may perhaps avoid a lot of dots.

3) I think that the notation should be consistent in the context.
In the example you created, you notated 4 quadruplet 8ths in the top staff, and 2 duplet 8ths in the keyboard part.
To me that seems inconsistent since the speed ratio between the top staff 8ths and the keyboard 8ths is 2:1.
Better with duplet 4trs in the keyboard part.

[Vaughan]

I agree that I was inconsistent and that the clusters should be quarters. But in other spots if I'd like to replace the dotted 8ths with duplets, they should also be quarters and that looks a bit strange. Somehow I'm used to seeing 8th duplets replacing 3 8ths in compound meters. This would mean that the quadruplet should be 16ths, which is generally looked upon as being incorrect. It remains a bit conflicting if one has to have both duplets and quadruplets in compound meters...

[Peter Thomsen]

I agree that I was inconsistent and that the clusters should be quarters. But in other spots if I'd like to replace the dotted 8ths with duplets, they should also be quarters and that looks a bit strange. Somehow I'm used to seeing 8th duplets replacing 3 8ths in compound meters …

If I were you, I would not worry about the duplet 4trs.
As Gould points out, it is an acceptable possibility.
If J. S. Bach could do it, then you can do it, too.
Bach uses quarters in « Orgelbüchlein » - in the chorale prelude « In dulci jubilo » (time signature: 9/8).