Page 1 of 2

Multi-bar rests

Posted: 07 Jul 2021, 15:37
by teacue
From how many bars do you use multi-bar rests in parts?
Personally, up to four or five bars I much prefer to read empty bars.

Are there any rules about when it is appropriate to use mutli-bars rests?

Re: Multi-bar rests

Posted: 07 Jul 2021, 16:00
by David Ward
Personally, I am happy to see a multi-bar rest as soon as there is more than one bar of rest (even if only two) as long as there are no indications such as rit, colla parte, col canto or anything else it might be useful to see placed in the correct bar in the part. I would not like to see four or five completely empty bars containing no cues or anything else that might be informative.

Anyway, I don't think there is anything incorrect about a two bar multi-bar rest and I've encountered numerous examples.

Re: Multi-bar rests

Posted: 07 Jul 2021, 16:14
by benwiggy
The Gospel according to Gould says: "This style of multiple rest bar may be used for any number of bars." There are examples of 2, 3, and more MBRs.

Gardner Read's Music Notation gives examples of MBRs from 2 upward.

Schirmer style guide says "Multiple bar rests should be used for any rest of two measures or more."

Ted Ross's Art of Music Engraving says "A rest of more than one measure is denoted by a heavy horizontal line, closed at each end by a short, thin vertical line."

Alfred Music's Essential Dictionary of Music Notation says: "For a rest of more than one measure..."

Kurt Stone's Music Notation in the 20th Century says "Two or more measures".

I'd say it's a firm standard.

Re: Multi-bar rests

Posted: 07 Jul 2021, 18:33
by teacue
Thank you David Ward and benwiggy for your thoughts.
I guess I have to reconsider my recurring tendency to do things in a different way!

Re: Multi-bar rests

Posted: 07 Jul 2021, 20:29
by John Ruggero
Just adding that A. Arnstein concurred with all of those sources given above regarding multi-measure rests for two or more measures rest. The only exception was the case mentioned by David Ward in forbidding changes of tempo and other markings that affected the whole ensemble placed "somewhere" within a single multi-measure rest, because this can lead to disaster in a rehearsal, as can a "recurring tendency to do things in a different way"!

He also didn't allow long multi-measure rests and always broke them up with non-vocal cues that could actually be heard by the musician involved. As I've probably mentioned too many times, orchestral musicians loved his instrumental parts because they were not taken by surprise by notational oddities and because they did not have to break up long multi-measure rests with their own cues.

Re: Multi-bar rests

Posted: 08 Jul 2021, 11:24
by teacue
@ John Ruggero
Thanks for your interesting answer.
Your thoughts directly lead me to a question about when cues are are appropriate and when not but I assume this question probably belongs to a new thread!
I rapidly made a search about A. Arnstein on notat.io but did not find a lot.
Is there somewhere a summary of his views on notation?

EDIT
After searching a little more I now discovered in this thread:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5&start=20
that you worked with Arnold Arnstein!
I also read that you wanted to write a manual.
Did you?

SECOND EDIT
After some more research (!) I found this very interesting thread with examples about cues:
viewtopic.php?t=188&start=30

Re: Multi-bar rests

Posted: 08 Jul 2021, 12:06
by Anders Hedelin
John Ruggero wrote: 07 Jul 2021, 20:29 He also didn't allow long multi-measure rests and always broke them up with non-vocal cues that could actually be heard by the musician involved. As I've probably mentioned too many times, orchestral musicians loved his instrumental parts because they were not taken by surprise by notational oddities and because they did not have to break up long multi-measure rests with their own cues.
Something I've thought about when writing cues is the different placement of the musicians in different orchestras. Any ideas about how to think about this? Should you always go for the trumpets (just a joke)?

Re: Multi-bar rests

Posted: 08 Jul 2021, 16:40
by Fred G. Unn
Anders Hedelin wrote: 08 Jul 2021, 12:06 Something I've thought about when writing cues is the different placement of the musicians in different orchestras. Any ideas about how to think about this?
Sure, a cue isn't very useful if the player can't hear it! If it makes musical sense and is a strong identifiable line, I tend to cue like instruments first (Tbn. 1 cue in a Tbn. 2 part), then families (Ob. 1 in a Fl. 3 part), then the strongest, most easily identifiable melodic line by whatever instrument that isn't a soloist or vocalist. Cueing like instruments will assure the cue will be heard and instruments within the same family (WWs, Brass, Strings) will be useful if there are sectional rehearsals. Soloists and vocalists/choirs often aren't at rehearsals so cueing them isn't always that useful, even if they are the strongest melodic line. For jazz ensemble writing, I use word cues fairly liberally too.

Re: Multi-bar rests

Posted: 08 Jul 2021, 17:10
by Anders Hedelin
Thank you Fred G. Unn, That's pretty much how I would do it. Sometimes it would be a help though knowing if this or that instrument is sitting next to this or that neighbour.

Re: Multi-bar rests

Posted: 08 Jul 2021, 17:46
by OCTO
teacue wrote: 07 Jul 2021, 15:37 Personally, up to four or five bars I much prefer to read empty bars.
As an orchestral musician (violin) I prefer, and always read so in almost all scores, that already two bars should be multi-rested. Reading two empty measures is a bit odd, what I can say.