A Million Notation Questions!

I may keep updating this as my own personal little thread seen as I ask so many questions about this stuff.

1. Are dynamics written above or below the staff to which they apply?

2. I am writing in the key of C in 3/4 time. I have one bar (dotted minim) of G# (which is notated as sharp) then a bar of G. Is it required of me to place a natural sign before the G?

3. Does a stringed instrument play louder/harder when an "arco" indication is given? (Reason 4 seems to think so.)

4. How do I notate a viola to play tremolo?

I might have some more later :D

Thanks.

Oh, one more, very important...

- How often is it necessary to write dynamics for an instrument? For example, if the flute plays a few notes in measure 6 with an mp indication and then plays another few notes in measure 10 also at mp, is it necessary to write mp for the flute in both measures?

1. Bellow in all except those instruments which have 2 staves (piano, harp), where the dynamics go between, and the vocal, where the lyrics go bellow, and thus dynamics go above. Everything else is BELLOW

2. It is NOT required, but it is advisable. Those accidentals are called "cautionary" and are pretty much used in music

3. arco, as opposed to pizz? If so yes, the arco playing IS louder, by default, than the pizz (which is tiny). I could be misunderstanding though.

4. Tremolo, in effect means the repetition of the same note (or two notes, when it's more than a 2nd, which then cannot be a trill). Three small lines, ON the note line, will do.

5. The beginning needs to have a dynamic, so that the performers will know how they start. After a rest, you do need to indicate again what's going on. In any crescento or diminuendo you need to show where the dynamics go. "Go louder" is unclear. "Go louder until ff" is much better. "Go louder from mf to ff" is perfect. ;)

1. Are dynamics written above or below the staff to which they apply?

Below. If the instrument uses more than one staff, the dynamic markings are written right square in between the staves. This does NOT apply to instruments with separated staves, such as in the case with a brief violin solo in an orchestra WHILE the violin section is playing its own part. In this case the appropriate dynamics are written below each staff.

2. I am writing in the key of C in 3/4 time. I have one bar (dotted minim) of G# (which is notated as sharp) then a bar of G. Is it required of me to place a natural sign before the G?

It would be nice to add a courtesy natural for clarification in many cases. This is a natural enclosed in parentheses and means that it is NOT an accidental, but reminds the player that it is NOT a sharp, as in the previous measure. There are also courtesy flats and sharps that can be used if a such a situation arises.

3. Does a stringed instrument play louder/harder when an "arco" indication is given? (Reason 4 seems to think so.)

Reason uses digital samples (I'll assume of live playing,) but it does not read your music the way a musician would. An arco indication simply tells a string player to use the bow as opposed to pizzicato. It has nothing to do with dynamics. When you want a string player to play pizzicato, write pizz. If you want them to switch back to using the bow, this is arco. If no marking is provided (beginning of piece/movement) a string player will play arco, so don't bother marking it.

4. How do I notate a viola to play tremolo?

The same as with other strings, you can write the note value of how long you want the tremolo to last and add to its stem three slanted slashes. This indicates 32nd notes, but in most cases will be treated as a tremolo. If you want to clarify, you can simply add tremolo above or below the notes in question, but you don't always need to.

5. How often is it necessary to write dynamics for an instrument?

If an instrument rests for say 4 measures, it will NOT be necessary to re-add the dynamic marking. Even ten measures, or more. If it is obvious what the last dynamic marking was, don't bother writing it again in the part. However, in the score, you may want to indicate it if there is a large rest between to help the conductor who has less music per page and has a harder time shuffling through pages looking for previous dynamics. Some composer choose to be rather redundant with dynamic markings. In same cases, this is only to serve as a reminder to the player and conductor, and in other cases it serves as emphasis. This is more common with forte and louder dynamics, that they will be written several times within a single or a couple phrases. All this means is that the composer wants THAT dynamic NOW. :happy:

I hope this helps. if anybody else has other ways of putting things, or sees that I'm wrong about anything, please speak up.

3. arco, as opposed to pizz? If so yes, the arco playing IS louder, by default, than the pizz (which is tiny). I could be misunderstanding though.

In QcCowboy's thread it says that coming back from pizz. to a normal bowed technique you use arco. Coming back from any other technique you use ord. So both ord. and arco are the same thing right?

But on Reason 4 there is a "cello arco" setting which is much louder and harder than the regular bowed cello setting.

That's what I was wondering about, am I missing something?

Thanks for your answers BTW :)

That seems rather odd. Arco should be the same thing as the way you always play if nobody tells you otherwise. Hence the "default" cello preset should be called "arco"--and if it isn't, there's no reason to have another "arco". Pure speculation: could it be that the "normal" preset is from a different collection, so to speak, and the "arco" is from a separate set of different samples which also has other bowing types?

Either way... you've got it right. Reason's got it wrong.

In QcCowboy's thread it says that coming back from pizz. to a normal bowed technique you use arco. Coming back from any other technique you use ord. So both ord. and arco are the same thing right!

No it's not the same

pizz. <> arco (the opposite)

sul pont. <> ord.

sul tasto <> ord.

con legno <> ord.

etc...

Pizzicato means taking the bow off and playing with the hand. Arco means with the bow. Everything else involves the bow, so the opposite is to go to the ord.(inary) playing, which is between sul tasto and sul pont, to the normal position and called "ord."

Reason is louder because they were recorded louder, nothing else. I don't have reason but it makes sense.

Reason is louder because they were recorded louder, nothing else. I don't have reason but it makes sense.

A generic "ordinario" sample and a generic "arco" sample ought to sound the same, though? Anything else would be quite unintuitive.

That's where notation books come handy :) And don't care about computer playback: it is often misleading writing in a way so that you get the playback sounds right, because with real players it won't sound like that.

Oh, one more, very important...

- How often is it necessary to write dynamics for an instrument? For example, if the flute plays a few notes in measure 6 with an mp indication and then plays another few notes in measure 10 also at mp, is it necessary to write mp for the flute in both measures?

contrary to the advice given above, it IS necesary to add the dynamic after any rest extending beyond the scope of a single measure.

Unless the music involves a repetitive figuration, which itself includes a lengthy rest, in that case it IS obvious that teh dynamic remains the same.

However, if the music after the rest is in any way different (and in MOST cases music IS different after a rest) then you are required to repeat the dynamic.

If the music changes registers during the span of the period of rest, this is doubly important.

By the way, four measures of rest is quite a lengthy period.

Therefore, rule of thumb to follow is: if the period of rest crosses a barline, and is itself longer than the value of a single measure, repeat the dynamic. This is for clarity's sake.

Well, in that case QC, most of the music I've read doesn't follow correct convention, because that's what I was drawing off of when I said what I said. :happy:

Well, in that case QC, most of the music I've read doesn't follow correct convention, because that's what I was drawing off of when I said what I said. :happy:

and yes, you ARE correct, they aren't following the correct notational convention.

don't base your opinion on what is right and wrong in music engraving off the scores you have. it's surprising just how many "professional" scores we have that are loaded with terrible errors.

On the other hand, if you follow my "guideline" you will never have trouble during rehearsals of your music. And in the end, that IS the only important consideration, is it not.

By the way, just for fun, I grabbed the first score off my shelf (Strawinski, Rite of Spring), and there it is, clear as day: first page, any instrument with more than a measure's worth of rest gets a repeat of its dynamic.

You can probably get away with eliminating a few of those repeated dynamics if the overall texture of your music remains the same, in the same dynamic, etc..

However, why leave it up to the musicians to guess your dynamics?

I strongly suggest you invest in an elementary book of musical theory - that should answer the vast majority of your questions, and inform you of the answers to many more you may not have considered. The Assosciated Board produces a number of good publications, but I'm sure a nose round any good music shop, or even at Amazon will produce some possibilities.

...why leave it up to the musicians to guess...?

This is some of the best advice you will ever hear regarding the composition of music. The less you specify... the less you clarify, the more likely it is that you will not receive the performance you intended. This is why I comment so frequently and hard against poor notational practices.

*salutes QcCowboy* Well done, sir.

Thanks for the extended answers everyone.

Now for today's question :D

6. In a piece I am writing there is a triangle hit. When I had this piece on Reason, the triangle hit was actually right on the note of C#, which is the key of the piece, so it was pretty handy.

But how do triangles work in real life. I've scored it on a treble clef labelled "Percussion", and just wrote "Triangle" above the note, which I scored as a C#5 (the first one above the treble clef, sound about right?). Is this the correct way to do it?

And how do triangles even work? Would a real life percussion player have a different triangle for each note? I'm also wondering about percussion in general, which despite being mainly rhythmic, still has a certain pitch to it.

Thanks.

These are called "indefinite pitch" instruments. Yes, some triangles sound at the pitch of C#, but I've noticed that a lot are tuned to sound like an A. But the truth is, they are supposed to be any particular note at all, so don't write for it to be any certain pitch. Most orchestras/bands will only have one triangle, or two if they are fussy, so don't be concerned with pitch. And again, don't treat Reason as your bible. In real life, triangles have so many higher harmonics that they sound different from depending on where you are in relation to the instrument. To write for triangle, put it anywhere on the stave. If it has it's own staff, make a one-lined percussion staff and put it on the center. If on a five-lined stave, it is sometimes put on the first ledger line above. Whatever you do, just make sure you mark it as triangle.

Snare drums are the same, as well as toms, bass drum, gong, ect. You can write for "high triangle" and "low triangle", or "high-pitched snare" and "low-pitched snare" (note that it is unusual to distinguish between low and high for these instruments in the first place), but there is no way you can get them to sound like the note you want. Again, they are all "indefinite pitch" instruments. Glockenspiel, timpani, and others, are called "definite pitch" instruments, and so they use treble or bass clef, whichever is appropriate. Indefinite pitch instruments are written on a percussion stave, which looks like either of these:

For you experts, why are there two different clefs? One I hear is "neutral clef" and the other "percussion clef". What is the difference?

Snare drums are the same, as well as toms, bass drum, gong, ect.

Gongs are pitched! Say tamtam if you refer to those big whooshy sound making thingies without a pitch! It gets so confusing otherwise :(

This quote is PURE GOLD.

This is some of the best advice you will ever hear regarding the composition of music. The less you specify... the less you clarify, the more likely it is that you will not receive the performance you intended. This is why I comment so frequently and hard against poor notational practices.

*salutes QcCowboy* Well done, sir.

... unless your intention is to be vague... then all performances are what you intended?

Just sayin'.

And I'm quite certain baroque composers would have been perfectly able to be more specific in their notation if they had wanted to.

This quote is PURE GOLD.

This is some of the best advice you will ever hear regarding the composition of music. The less you specify... the less you clarify, the more likely it is that you will not receive the performance you intended. This is why I comment so frequently and hard against poor notational practices.

*salutes QcCowboy* Well done, sir.

Unless you can count on the personality of the performers and feel that they also have to input something into the work, so it makes sense to be 95% clear rather than 100%! :D

In all honesty, I'm working on a work, which I hope will create myriads of different performances and variations! Should be a blast to compare different pianists and different inputs! :D

I'll have to say that, yes, if you are writing something that someone is going to work on and perfect, it's fine not to notate every little nuance and trust to the performer.

But on the other hand, if you are going into situations where you are recording in a studio... write EVERYTHING down. Your music may only get a read-through before they record it. In these situations (and any situation where there's little time for rehearsal), the clearer you can make your intentions, the more likely you will get a good performance.

Even if you're not heading to the recording studio, many ensembles, unless the work "looks difficult", will only do a cursory play-through of your piece before deciding whether to perform it. It behooves you to give as much information as you can.

Question 256. When using "accel." and "rit." how do you notate where these expressions end? And how do you notate their degree i.e. how quickly to speed up or slow down?

:D

I would think those nit picky things can be interpreted by the conductor.

Unless you really want it to be a certain tempo after the accel/rit, otherwise, I really don't think it matters.

BUT YOU SHOULD, because I read some good points in the thread just then. :P

Generally an accelerando or ritardando ends with the next tempo indication, be that a rit. after an accel., a pi

Thanks Gardener.

:)