O/T notation question

[Michel R E]

would it be understood that the pattern in the glockenspiel here is to be repeated ad lib (as in not on the beat), accellerating, until the end?

[bkshepard]

Does the tempo accelerate or just the rhythm? If it's the latter, it might be clearer to use a feather-beam approach.

[Michel R E]

the tempo of the glock accelerates, while the rest of the orchestra slows down.
I can't use a feather beam because I don't want to specify how many times the pattern repeats, and don't want to include that while pattern for every potential iteration in the measure.

[bkshepard]

Yeah, I was thinking you would keep it notated as is with the first couple of notes, but spread the beams out into 3 for the last part before the arrow.

[David Ward]

Yes, is my answer, but a suitable gesture from the conductor might help in first rehearsal. BTW I think ed accel. might be more idiomatic than e accel.

[Jay Emmes]

From the notation I would think I'm asked to only repeat the B and G# ad libitum and accelerando until the next measure. In most scores I see the note heads of all the desired notes in a rectangle with the arrow as you drew and accompanied by the comment to play them in sequence but free in tempo and accelerating until the next measure. No need to use Italian.

[RVS Lee]

Michel -

FWIW, I agree with Jay that it would be much clearer to include the entire six note pattern, as would extending the beams. However...

If you do extend the beams, I would flatten them, so as not to suggest that the pattern descends with each iteration.
I wouldn't box the noteheads as it implies random durations within the accelerating tempo.

RVSL

[Michel R E]

I ended up removing everything except the first instance of the pattern in the first measure, then including the horizontal line with arrow, and the text expression "ripetere senza ritenuto". It's a slightly different meaning (I removed the idea of accelerating), but it works in the context.