Best practice for wind parts in large orch piece

[shnootre]

Greetings,

Been using Finale for 28 years or so now, but still haven't conquered this one and I wonder what the collective wisdom can offer.
I am writing an orchestral fanfare for large orchestra - winds are in 3s.

As is traditional, I want to have my Fl 1+2, Ob 1+2 etc. on one staff in the score (it is likely I won't need to expand any into a two-stave scenario in this piece).

In my mind, I've decided that since the piece is short, the best thing to do is just make the score how I want it, and then making a duplicate score where I add staves for the seconds. And in truth, the dream of truly "linked parts" more often than not is just that (it's just so much trouble to keep the score and parts in one functional document).

That said - is there any best practice around this. Do any of you have this figured out in a deep way? It's always seemed weird to me that Finale doesn't deal with this very common situation. (unless they do and I'm ignorant of something!)

Thanks.

[Michel R E]

I've always made two (three actually) versions of any of my orchestral scores:
1) the conductor's score (full score) with instruments consolidated by pairs, etc...
2) the "parts" score, where all instruments have their own individual staves, and the orchestral queues are in place.

This way, I REALLY don't have to worry about any changes in one part affecting another, or my score.

and just so you know:
3) a playback score, which has each instrument on an individual staff, including percussion instruments, and where I can fudge with notation to get better playback.

[shnootre]

This makes sense - and basically conforms to what I've been doing - was just hoping maybe there was a better way!!

[bkshepard]

I second Michael's process. I start with a full score that has individual lines for every instrument. From that, I create a playback score as he described, and also condense some of the pairs of instruments onto single staves to create a conductor score. It's a bit of a pain to keep track of all the changes and make sure they all get into all three scores (red pens come in handy), but it's the only way I've found to create the score, parts, and mockup they way I want them.

[Anders Hedelin]

I've always made two (three actually) versions of any of my orchestral scores:
1) the conductor's score (full score) with instruments consolidated by pairs, etc...
2) the "parts" score, where all instruments have their own individual staves, and the orchestral queues are in place.

This way, I REALLY don't have to worry about any changes in one part affecting another, or my score.

There's much to be said for Michel's method, I think. I've had such advice as to split the wind pairs on to two new staves in one and the same document, and then hide them in page (print) view, but that would mean a lot more staves and an endless scrolling up and down when allocating cues (in Scroll View of course) - for example. I too feel much more free when working with separate conductor's and parts scores. I really doubt that you would save time or grey hairs keeping everything in one document.

[Anders Hedelin]

It's a bit of a pain to keep track of all the changes and make sure they all get into all three scores (red pens come in handy), but it's the only way I've found to create the score, parts, and mockup they way I want them.

Also good advice, in my experience. "Red pens" - or, copy all changes immediately to the other score(s)! Don't wait.

[Michel R E]

I just made some massive revisions to an older score, my 1st symphony, and simply did not have the time or energy to start correcting the pre-existing score/parts.

So in this case, I actually think it will be faster for me to create new a score and parts for the work.

However, I generally immediately make changes from one score to the other when I bring revisions to a work.