NOTATIO

Thanks Knut!
I look forward to reading this thread more carefully.
A.

Knut wrote: ↑17 Aug 2017, 08:56 Edit: FYI, I've now replaced all (I think) my missing pdf uploads with jpegs.

Thank you for your effort!!

To all Sibelius users: How did you resolve the beaming issue ("beam corners") in bar 1, which can be seen in odod's first attempt (sorry for pointing that out again):
viewtopic.php?p=2797#p2797

Whatever I do, I can't seem to resolve the problem in Sibelius itself; the manual doesn't help either.
Apparently, it's a known issue in Sibelius, as pointed out by Daniel Spreadbury in the Dorico blog:
http://blog.steinberg.net/2015/03/devel ... y-part-10/

Sometimes if you change the original staff (from upper to lower or vice versa) the situation resolves itself.

RMK wrote: ↑03 Oct 2017, 12:05 Sometimes if you change the original staff (from upper to lower or vice versa) the situation resolves itself.

Not having Sibelius on this machine to test, I think it might be the case.

So, here is my attempt. I must admit that I found it quite challenging to do this in Sibelius. I didn't find a way to resolve the beaming issues in mm. 1, 9 and 11 in Sibelius, I had to use Illustrator for that.
With regard to editorial decisions: I simply followed the new Henle edition, which can be studied here:
http://www.henle.de/de/detail/index.htm ... .+119_1250

Unfortunately, for a detailed discussion of their editorial decisions they refer to the commentary section of their Brahms Gesamtausgabe (2011), which cannot be accessed online:
http://www.henle.de/de/detail/index.htm ... BCcke_6014

It would have been interesting to learn about their reasons for retaining some of the passages in the first edition that John pointed out as problematic in his commentary.

I had a look at the Bärenreiter edition of Brahm's op. 119 today. It's surprisingly bad. Some of the details scream "computer-engraved", and not in a good way.
https://www.baerenreiter.com/shop/produ ... ls/BA9631/

Excellent engraving, liuscorne! Perhaps someone will add a Dorico example, and the original intent of this thread will begin to be fullfilled. Bärenreiter, seems to be losing its way. See
http://www.finaleforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=15639

John Ruggero wrote: ↑11 Oct 2017, 15:37 Perhaps someone will add a Dorico example ...

I did the first page as a test case when I first got Dorico, but I was not particularly impressed with the results. Of course, with an equivalent amount of time spent on manual adjustments as I did with my Finale engraving, the results would have been almost just as good, but I was very disappointed to discover that Dorico will not allow centred beaming at the interval of a second, as in m. 11 etc. I'd say that is a deal-breaker for this particular piece.

John Ruggero wrote: ↑11 Oct 2017, 15:37 Excellent engraving, lluscorne! Perhaps someone will add a Dorico example, and the original intent of this thread will begin to be fullfilled. Bärenreiter, seems to be losing its way. See
http://www.finaleforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=15639

Sorry to interrupt the flow here, apropos MuseScore. I have done the first row in MS2 (didn't have much time than), and the result is here:
https://notat.io/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=148&start=40#p2582
So we have an example of that software as well. I don't think that MS2 is far behind the current competitors, still one must know the notation far more better than, I guess the case is with, Dorico.