Soliciting Opinions about Repeats

[thomsmit57]

Hello All:

I am preparing parts for an orchestral piece I've written. In the full part for one of the guitars, I have several two bar patterns that I have not yet decided on how best to notate. (clarity vs. saving space/page count, etc.)

In the attached file I pulled out a few examples.
A = how the part plays, until the music changes
B = is one way I've thought of notating the 2nd, or repeated measure
C = is a simple one bar repeat, then moves on to the next pattern, which could also show a one bar repeat too.

D = a 3 bar phrase traded with another guitar. Several of them occur after this.
Obviously it is crowded on one line, but is shown as the original.
E = one way of doing it.
F = another way, with the one bar repeat again.

To all experienced orchestral players out there: (even though it is a guitar part, I think Wind and String players could possibly see something like this)
Which in the two groups of lettered examples is MOST clear to you? What would you most likely see in this situation and is there a better way to present it? Which is clearest and would make the most sense to you as a player seeing this for probably one (or two) rehearsals?

This is not for Finale playback or DAW presentation; I hope to have real human beings playing from these parts and want them to be professional and clear for skilled, experienced musicians.

Thanks for taking the time to peruse. I look forward to opinions.
P.S. page 2 shows a few other examples; more of the same

[N Grossingink]

I don't know what to say about the repeated bars - it would be better to see the entire part. I think you're on the right track, except, I wouldn't use repeat bars just for one part. Anotherwords, repeat bars that don't exist in the score.

There are some staves where the ledger lines are touching. It almost looks like there are 6 staff lines with the Cs looking like Es. I would resize the staff of the entire part to 95%, and the noteheads of only the tight staves to 95%. You can use the free JW Change plugin to resize the noteheads. See below.

[John Ruggero]

I would write out two-bar repeats. If it is a three- or more-bar repeat, I would place a repeat mark in each measure and number it. I wouldn't use repeat signs around single bars. Whatever you do, make the score and part identical.

As mentioned by N Grossingink, the touching ledger lines are a no-no. I would reduce note head size only as a last resort. In this case, D and E are easily fixed by moving the last bar or two to the next line and/or reducing the width of the measures that contain rests.

[thomsmit57]

N. and John:

Thanks for your insights.
Yes, I was aware of the ledger lines touching and crowding; I just wanted to get an example up of what it was looking like unadulterated. You can see what I'm up against. Will fix all that when I start laying the part out for real.

I am thanking both of you for the fact that you said essentially the same thing about not putting repeat bars into a part when they don't occur in the score. Hadn't really considered that as a problem. Well, I knew that if I did do it, I would be doing a lot of measure number fussing so the part lined up with the score. But it's looking like it will just be this one part, out of 18 total. So I'll have to come up with some creative page turns, or the player will have to memorize the part! Ha! Wouldn't that be something? The piece is kind of Guitar Duo Concerto-ish after all. so I guess it might not be too far fetched.

[John Ruggero]

If the score and parts differ in any way, for example, if a repeated section has a first and second ending in the score, but not in a part, this can lead to major rehearsal problems. If your guitar part is non-stop, then you will have to get creative. Use fold-out pages, put a lot of systems on a page. Make the numbered repeated measures very narrow. In extreme cases, you might very well have to have to indicate single measures with repeat signs around them in both score and parts. If you would like me to look at the part for suggestions regarding page turns, send it to me in a private message.

[N Grossingink]

What is your page size? Back in the pen-and-ink days pro copyists used 9 1/2 x 12 1/2 size paper.

[thomsmit57]

N: I used that 9 1/2 x 12 1/2 size paper back in my pen-and-ink days! My current paper size for computer-age parts is 9 x 12. I already buy 12 x 18" paper and then cut it in half for use in my personal printer, which can handle it.
I understand that the larger paper sizes are available, and would be pretty cool if I had the time to experiment with them, but right now, 9 x 12 is most convenient and meets the minimum standards for orchestral parts.

John: Thanks for the offer, but I think I'm getting there. It is taking creativity; almost as much as actually composing! My composition is for 2 guitars and (smaller..chamber?) orchestra. And most of the crowding problems and page turn difficulties seem to lie in the Guitar 1 part.
In addition to shrinking a few systems so ledger lines and 16th notes don't run into each other, I've come to the realization that Guitar 1 will just have a couple of quick page turns that the player will have learn to execute. Part of the job. (1 full measure of 12/8 + more than half of a preceding measure at dotted quarter = 69 - 72) I think a dexterous player with a dog-eared part could pull it off. Don't want to get into fold-outs if I can absolutely help it.

[John Ruggero]

Personally, I would rather have a fold-out page than a risky turn. And Arnold Arnstein used them all the time in orchestral parts to avoid risky turns. They are obviously best for the first and last pages where they can folded out before the piece begins. And only on an interior page if there is a lot of time to fold out or turn.