Comment needed
Posted: 22 Mar 2016, 10:58
Please, give me some suggestions for improvements.
...If needed, start a new topic for focus on details!Actually, here I see the mistake. The grace-note should be parenthesised trill note.– Piano upper staff, 2nd bar, 2nd beat: If it's deemed necessary to add a cautionary natural on the D grace note, then by the same logic it is also necessary to add a small natural sign at the trill. This, in turn, will render the natural at the grace note redundant.
I think I would keep this here.– Piano upper staff, 2nd bar, 3rd beat: I personally would not place a natural sign here. At first sight, it looks like "is there a flat missing on the previous B?" By modern rules, accidentals (in this case, the B flat of the lower staff) do not apply to other staves, but others might have a different opinion in this situation.
What arpeggio symbol do you have in mind, arpeggio?– Piano lower staff, 2nd bar, 2nd beat: Wouldn't an arpeggio sign be appropriate also here?
Thinking again, and having second thoughts about this now. I would also keep the cautionary natural, but put in between parentheses.erelievonen wrote:– Piano upper staff, 2nd bar, 3rd beat: I personally would not place a natural sign here. At first sight, it looks like "is there a flat missing on the previous B?" By modern rules, accidentals (in this case, the B flat of the lower staff) do not apply to other staves, but others might have a different opinion in this situation.
The same as on the 3rd beat.OCTO wrote:What arpeggio symbol do you have in mind, arpeggio?– Piano lower staff, 2nd bar, 2nd beat: Wouldn't an arpeggio sign be appropriate also here?
I'm not sure I understand. So you would keep the grace note stem directions the same as in OCTO's original example? There, the grace notes on the 1st beat have a different stem direction from the rest. That's also not consistent with the melodic line.John Ruggero wrote:2. Top staff, 1st bar, 3rd beat I prefer keeping the beaming direction the same as that on the 2nd beat to better show the progression of the melodic lines.
It's indeed 11:6 (32nds). In this case, 11:12 (64ths) might be a better way of notating it. In either case, it would help to show the ratio.John Ruggero wrote:8. The first beat Piano doesn't add add up. An 11:6 marking?
erelievonen wrote:2. Top staff, 1st bar, 3rd beat I prefer keeping the beaming direction the same as that on the 2nd beat to better show the progression of the melodic lines.
Yes, I meant that the grace notes might keep their original stem directions. However, if it would work with all up stems that is even better. I was not sure that the grace notes on beat two would work with up stems without actually trying it to see how it all looked with the beams on the real notes high enough for the grace note beams to clear.I'm not sure I understand. So you would keep the grace note stem directions the same as in OCTO's original example? There, the grace notes on the 1st beat have a different stem direction from the rest. That's also not consistent with the melodic line. I would first try stems up for all the grace notes.