Repeated tone abbreviations Part 2

Discuss the rules of notation, standard notation practices, efficient notation practices and graphic design.
OCTO
Posts: 1273
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 06:52
Location: Sweden

Re: Repeated tone abbreviations Part 2

Post by OCTO » 18 Mar 2016, 14:23

Only one is Wess! Congrats on so detailed technique!
Freelance Composer. Self-Publisher.
Finale 25.5 • Sibelius 2019 • MuseScore 2+3 • Logic Pro X • Ableton Live 9+10 • Digital Performer 9 /// OS X El Capitan, (side system: Debian 9, Windows 10)

Ralph L. Bowers jr.
Posts: 9
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 15:14

Re: Repeated tone abbreviations Part 2

Post by Ralph L. Bowers jr. » 18 Mar 2016, 17:48

Wess an elegant solution.
Are you selling you Tremolo font and Articulation library for it?

Knut
Posts: 867
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 18:07
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: Repeated tone abbreviations Part 2

Post by Knut » 18 Mar 2016, 19:25

A brilliant solution, Wess, even if it still is a lot of work!

To my knowledge, Steinberg, both through their own product and SMuFL, is advocating tremolos to be drawn using primitives rather than font characters. Considering the the different types (parallel, constant slant and finger tremolos) developers have to consider, this is a much better solution in my opinion.

Knut
Posts: 867
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 18:07
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: Repeated tone abbreviations Part 2

Post by Knut » 18 Mar 2016, 19:59

John Ruggero wrote: Also, I am not experienced with the Patterson plugin. Is it correct that the slashes should have a constant width, as should the beams at every angle?
Without trying to speak for Wess, I'd say a definite yes to this question. In plate engraving the tool for drawing beams was rotated according to the slant angle, making the beam thickness constant, regardless of angle. Finale (and most other scoring applications use sheared rather than rotated primitives, which makes the beams appear thinner as their angle becomes steeper. The Patterson Beams plug-in gives the user the option to compensate the beam thickness for this effect.

This is something the Steinberg team has addressed in their application, using rotated beams to keep them at constant width.

User avatar
David Ward
Posts: 292
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 19:50
Location: Aberdeenshire, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Repeated tone abbreviations Part 2

Post by David Ward » 18 Mar 2016, 21:46

Reading this thread makes me feel that the attached looks a bit odd!

But then as things are, I'm not going to do very much about it, as all the solutions discussed here seem to risk taking away from composing time without any crucial gain; and anyway, these are intended to be unmeasured tremoli (muted violins at crotchet=54), so perhaps they may be correct as they are (info for those who use Finale: Jari's plug-in has been applied).
Attachments
BeamedTrem.png
BeamedTrem.png (86.07 KiB) Viewed 5512 times
Finale 25.5 & F 26.1
Mac OS 10.13.6 & 10.14.6
http://www.composers-uk.com/davidward/news.htm

User avatar
wess-music
Posts: 51
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 10:40

Re: Repeated tone abbreviations Part 2

Post by wess-music » 19 Mar 2016, 00:14

Dear John, I am sorry to be late with my answer. Honestly, I must say that in a very first moment I couldn't understand quite well your question.
But now: the thickness and distance between beams are options and they might be changed when needed (automatically).
Our friend Knut actually described the situation.

Plan "B" for such needs in Finale is "Beam width tool" (within Special tool).

What I wanted to add is only the fact, that I am critical to Finale's defaults where the beams are 12 EVPUs (½ space)
(I am not going to miss the focus talking about awfully pre-defined slurs, hair-pins and ties.)
_________
Personally, for more than 15 years I apply 14 EVPUS (for beam width) and till this moment there are no complains.
If you ask me now "why" I would stay speechless for a couple of seconds and at the end I'll tell you, that many of my settings were transferred (adopted) from ... SCORE software and also measuring /scanning big number of German scores just for analysis.
I can not express my satisfaction (except only from slurs) when for a first time I touched notes printed with SCORE software.
And I considered that many of the settings and the principals (seen by SCORE) can work with some additional fixes with Finale, too – or even Sibelius, why not.

Back to the beams and Patterson plug-in — I think this plugin is kind of "must have". I switched off all its automatisation within the options which could affect the thickness and distance between beams. But the angle and some other part of it works brilliantly.
(The shortcut in my Mac for this plugin is [Cmd+B])

Many friend of mine, mostly working audio projects, express their happiness when they find a vintage plugin improving the sound to be warm and "round".
The same filling I have when some nice looking printed or computerised score opens for my eyes.
The control over the beams, ties and slurs аrе the first elements that betray the engravers dedication and his/her level of expertise.
Note heads are automatically input, therefore their "role" is more or less dimmed by all other symbols that take place on the page.
And as a kind of the desert in the "menu" — come all nice looking and well harmonised to each other fonts plus proper vertical and horizontal allotment.
I do believe that keeping the rules is easy and necessary, but nice looking scores are those — full of surprises and containing extraordinary exceptions.
______________

Two posts above Knut spotted that:
"In plate engraving the tool for drawing beams was rotated according to the slant angle, making the beam thickness constant, regardless of angle."
I can't agree more. Theoretically it is true, absolutely.

However working with software, that allows me to compensate beam width I calculated that if the beam is 14 EVPU (not 12 by default) and the slant angle is 10º the (width) compensation must be approximately 2%. IMO, it is negligible.
However, 20º require 6% compensation – it's almost (even less than) 1 EVPU. Patterson beams as well as "Beam width tool" use integer values.
And this "1" would be pretty good.

In addition: +1 EVPU will be enough to compensate even 26º slant.

And for more steeply slants – laid between 27º and 35º — 2 EVPU are required.
Nevertheless, In my daily work I apply usually less than 10º...

One very positive option in "Patterson beams plugin" is the compensation for a distance between beams in order to avoid crosses with staff lines.
______________

BTW, are there recent news form Steinberg and Daniel's new software?
Last edited by wess-music on 19 Mar 2016, 00:47, edited 1 time in total.

Knut
Posts: 867
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 18:07
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: Repeated tone abbreviations Part 2

Post by Knut » 19 Mar 2016, 00:42

wess-music wrote:However working with software, that allows me to compensate beam width I calculated that if the beam is 14 EVPU (not 12 by default) and the slant angle is 10º the (width) compensation must be approximately 2%. IMO, it is negligible.
However, 20º require 6% compensation – it's almost (even less than) 1 EVPU. Patterson beams as well as "Beam width tool" use integer values.
The difference may be negligible if your default thickness is 14 EVPU, but in my opinion, for beams closer to 12 EVPU, it is not. This would also largely depend on your maximum angle setting. For relatively flat angles (e.g. Henle) width compensation is a lot less essential than for 'Ted Ross style' beam angles.

Anyway, while the Beam Width tool only allows the user to adjust the thickness by integer values, the Patterson Beams plug-in does not. Don't ask me how this is possible, but it is.

MJCube
Posts: 130
Joined: 15 Dec 2015, 13:32
Location: NYC

Re: Repeated tone abbreviations Part 2

Post by MJCube » 19 Mar 2016, 19:10

David Ward wrote:and anyway, these are intended to be unmeasured tremoli (muted violins at crotchet=54), so perhaps they may be correct as they are
1. I was told by a composer many years ago that in modern notation unmeasured tremolos should always have 3 slashes, regardless of the tempo or the number of beams. Your example clearly represents 32nd notes.

2. I don’t see why these flat and nearly-flat beams are to be preferred. That’s the first thing I notice that looks wrong about this example. And the shortest stem in 3 of the 4 beam groups is too short to accommodate the slash.

3. Tremolo is not a noun in Italian; it is a verb (“I tremble”). Therefore “tremoli” is a false plural. Since it becomes a noun in English usage, the plural is “tremolos”.

User avatar
John Ruggero
Posts: 1503
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 14:25
Location: Raleigh, NC USA

Re: Repeated tone abbreviations Part 2

Post by John Ruggero » 19 Mar 2016, 19:12

David, I would never have guessed that those were unmeasured tremolos and would have assumed the opposite. I think another slash (of whatever species) and a trem. marking might be in order.
Mac mini (OS 10.8.5) with dual monitors, Kurzweil Mark 5 with M-Audio Midisport 2 x 2,
Finale 2014d with GPO 4, JW Plug-ins, SmartScore X Pro, Adobe InDesign CS4,
Inkscape .48.5 and .91, FontForge 20150526
http://www.cantilenapress.com

User avatar
David Ward
Posts: 292
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 19:50
Location: Aberdeenshire, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Repeated tone abbreviations Part 2

Post by David Ward » 20 Mar 2016, 00:04

MJCube wrote: 1. I was told by a composer many years ago that in modern notation unmeasured tremolos should always have 3 slashes, regardless of the tempo or the number of beams. Your example clearly represents 32nd notes.
I'm not sure that everyone agrees that in modern notation unmeasured tremolos should always have three slashes even when beamed. However, given the slow tempo, two slashes might be more sensible here than one. John's suggestion of adding the direction ‘trem.’ would help clarify things.
MJCube wrote:2. I don’t see why these flat and nearly-flat beams are to be preferred. That’s the first thing I notice that looks wrong about this example. And the shortest stem in 3 of the 4 beam groups is too short to accommodate the slash.
Agreed, and I shall endeavour to improve these (for now the score is only a draft, albeit in Finale for circulating to relevant people, rather than my MS).
MJCube wrote:3. Tremolo is not a noun in Italian; it is a verb (“I tremble”). Therefore “tremoli” is a false plural. Since it becomes a noun in English usage, the plural is “tremolos”.
I have it on what I think is reasonably good authority (a musician whose first language is Italian and backed up by the relevant entry in the 1995 Collins Italian dictionary) that in its specifically musical sense tremolo can be a noun in Italian. However, it WAS precious of me to use that plural when typing in English.
Finale 25.5 & F 26.1
Mac OS 10.13.6 & 10.14.6
http://www.composers-uk.com/davidward/news.htm

Post Reply