NOTATIO

OCTO wrote: ↑24 Aug 2023, 15:08 K. Stockhausen has something like 93.6 markings, I believe he wants to get EXACT tempo transition (ratio).

For me that's a reminder of the sad times when composers tried to be scientists. As if being a musician wasn't enough.

I meant stems, ok, the hairpins do cross them, but are cut so lines don't intersect. I don't know of a rule saying that hairpins may not intersect stems, or staves, which they often have to do in keyboard and harp writing. In this case the alternatives are not too convincing: above or below the two...

MichelRE wrote: ↑06 Aug 2023, 16:58 you can take what you want from what that teacher said, but it's irrelevant to the discussion in question here.

you are comparing things that are not equivalent.

The discussion in itself might have become slightly irrelevant.

there is a distinct difference between "start with Bach-style inventions", which implies a lack of basic craft and requires years of work to gain such, It could also imply that the teacher giving such an advice was at a loss when meeting someone who was not sufficiently inferior to himsel...

Just a little update: I've decided to pull back from this plan, for now anyway: more in due course. I remember when starting with Finale in the 80's, having no experience of any digital notation whatsoever, and not even access to a manual, but all the same starting with a rather demanding work of m...

In the old times there were very few tempo marks. I had tempo marks (without c. ca. ca etc.) in one of my compositions, but in one performance the musicians chose tempi that were far too fast. What to do? Sue them? I've made quite a few engravings respecting the composer's notation of 'circa' tempo ...

Another (perhaps whimsical) thought: the sign ≈ means approximately equal to when used by mathematicians. Has anyone ever seen :4 ≈ 120 in a musical score? I have written :4 ≤ 152 in a score, ie less than or equal to 152, intending it to imply that the performer should play as near to 152 as is pra...

Now and then I get jobs where the language in use is English. David's comment, instructive as it is, makes the issue quite complicated. Isn't there any "one way" to write this circa abbreviation for us non-native English speakers, to get away with?

Also workable, I think. I would still use 'Extend secondary beams over rests', though, for three reasons: A. The process may be made much simpler, like this: Unbroken secondary beams 3.JPG 1. Input with 'Extend secondary beams over rests' selected. 2. Break secondary beams at x. Done. B. Working wit...

No, it wasn't you who were dense, it was me. It had slipped my mind that you can double-click on the boxes in Beam Extension Tool and select which beam(s) to extend. I'm sorry! But I think I might have found an even better solution to the problem all the same. Using 'Extend secondary beams over rest...