NOTATIO

John Ruggero wrote:I've changed my mind, Knut. Your first one is definitely best because the upper lines, even if considered independently, should be included in the legato, which was the point you were making. Sorry it took me a while. I hereby disavow the S-shaped slur.

Glad to hear it!

If btw the middle fifth could be considered a mere decoration that it would make sense to exclude from the slur, an alternate solution would be simply reversing the slur:

Yes, that would bring out the lower voices visually and reduce the importance of the upper voices, just as your first one does the opposite. But I prefer the first because the RH is not a mere decoration, but upper voices coming in later. I had considered both possibilities before I first posted, but went with the S-slur as a compromise that would point out the LH movement. But it was an unholy compromise.

John Ruggero wrote:Yes, that would bring out the lower voices visually and reduce the importance of the upper voices, just as your first one does the opposite. But I prefer the first because the RH is not a mere decoration, but upper voices coming in later. I had considered both possibilities before I first posted, but went with the S-slur as a compromise that would point our the LH movement. But it was an unholy compromise.

I agree. I just thought I would share the final option for the sake of completion as well as the fact that S-haped slurs are normally preserved for situations where the slur would otherwise interfere with other voices.

Knut wrote:

S-shaped slurs are normally preserved for situations where the slur would otherwise interfere with other voices.

The S-shaped and other such slurs also occur in keyboard music where the melody passes between the staves:

Examples of S-shaped and other interestingly-shaped slurs at:

http://ks.imslp.info/files/imglnks/usim ... Book_1.pdf

pages 3, 9, 18, 21, 22, 23, 32, 32, 34, 36 etc.

and

http://ks.imslp.info/files/imglnks/usim ... 7_scan.pdf

.

John Ruggero wrote:Knut wrote:

S-shaped slurs are normally preserved for situations where the slur would otherwise interfere with other voices.

The S-shaped and other such slurs also occur in keyboard music where the melody passes between the staves:

Examples of S-shaped and other interestingly-shaped slurs at:

http://ks.imslp.info/files/imglnks/usim ... Book_1.pdf

pages 3, 9, 18, 21, 22, 23, 32, 32, 34, 36 etc.

and

http://ks.imslp.info/files/imglnks/usim ... 7_scan.pdf

.

Thanks, John!

In light of the example discussed, I thought that was what I said. Anyway, that was certainly what I meant, and as most of these examples illustrate, the main reason for doing this is to avoid collisions with other voices, while at the same time clarifying the intended line and saving vertical space.

You are most welcome, Knut. The slurs in this music are really wonderful, aren't they? The ones on page 9 are really unusual, used as they are because of the clef change.

John Ruggero wrote:You are most welcome, Knut. The slurs in this music are really wonderful, aren't they? The ones on page 9 are really unusual, used as they are because of the clef change.

Indeed, and a good example where clarifying the line is the objective, rather than avoiding collisions. Similar slurs on page 21 are even better examples, where many probably would have use a normal shape at the expense of such clarification.

The two collections actually are very relevant to the problem presented in this thread. At the bottom of page 14 of book 1 you can see a similar scenario with the slur above (albeit without the tuplet and with the middle staccato dot on the stem side, which I'm not sure is the best solution). Page 9, 2nd system of book 2, on the other hand, presents a kind of turned version of slur on the side of the outer notes, suggested by OCTO and yourself. Notice however that given the context, this is the only sensible placement. Having the slur on the side of the middle note would be quite illogical given the preceding measures.