Splited Glissando How to Notate it

Hey,

I'm making the last revision in the score of The Warrior of the Iron Mountains before sending to the copyright office, since I finished it on 2004 I have never known how to notate the trombones glissando at the opening of 5th movement.

I just edited it but I think is still wrong, it may be a better way. I didn't upload the complete score on YC, but I will as soon as I register it, .... I just have to fix that first.

The Mov5page1-10.pdf are the first 10 pages of the 5th movement where the glissando are played.

You can listen that movement (the entire piece actually) here on YC (the thread here)

TrbGlissquestion.jpg shows how I currectly notate it.

in case you have useless ears and you can't recognize the glissando in the recording, I also created an audio with the glissando alone, listen here.

I can use quarter sharps but that would be a true glissando so, .... ideas ?

Also, I want to know if the Horn can play it too, to write it in the horn parts or remove that "if possible these playes should ..."

Mov5page1-10.pdf

From what you notated, I would perform it as you seem to want it. There's bound to be many ways to notate it, but yours seems pretty solid.

Side note: Angle the gliss along with the direction in pitch. I.e. the second one should slope upwards, as the pitch goes upwards. ;)

Oh¡ you're right, I will move the second line.

So you think that is clear enough for tombone players ? is not confusing or something like "what did this guy wrote here ?"

Ok, thanks, but I think it might be a more defined way to do it, maybe those composers who write weird like clusters etc.... anyway, if it's clear enough what I'm asking I may leave it that way, I just correct that line you mention.

EDIT:

Something about the horns ?

I actually don't suggest notating it as you did. If you write a gliss. using headless notes it's usually to suggest to a player where he or she should be at a certain time. Since you only want the players to slide a half step your intermediate rhythms seem pointless. Instead I would write a half note and use the gliss. to show that you want a slide to the next note. You don't even need to write gliss., but most composers do. Use a slur if you don't want the arrival note articulated. Horns can probably fudge it since it's only a half step, but I normally wouldn't write like that since strings and some winds can play more convincing portamento.

I actually don't suggest notating it as you did. If you write a gliss. using headless notes it's usually to suggest to a player where he or she should be at a certain time. Since you only want the players to slide a half step your intermediate rhythms seem pointless. Instead I would write a half note and use the gliss. to show that you want a slide to the next note. You don't even need to write gliss., but most composers do. Use a slur if you don't want the arrival note articulated. Horns can probably fudge it since it's only a half step, but I normally wouldn't write like that since strings and some winds can play more convincing portamento.

Dude, listen to the clip he gave us... it demonstrates precisely the effect he wants. Which is really only possible by specifying the rhythms.

Dude, listen to the clip he gave us... it demonstrates precisely the effect he wants. Which is really only possible by specifying the rhythms.

Oh crap, I'm so sorry about that! Yeah, what you have should work fine. You can always include a performance note if you're worried about it.

Why don't you just write the E-slide-E flat then D-slide-D flat? I think that would be easy for a broken gliss. The horn could do this, however I might suggest putting it up an octave. Horn can be pretty... grumbly down there :blink:

Why don't you just write the E-slide-E flat then D-slide-D flat? I think that would be easy for a broken gliss. The horn could do this, however I might suggest putting it up an octave. Horn can be pretty... grumbly down there :blink:

Because the notes he wants are E - slide - Eb and then Eb - slide - E.

Didn't anyone actually look at what he wants?!

Didn't anyone actually look at what he wants?!

Ok, I think you should listen the orchestral recording at the YC page and the score with all staves posted here because the picture/recording alone might give you an unclear idea.

I don't want to merge the beat into a large note, so that's the best I thought ...

The horns are playing it in different octaves, and remember they play a B - Bb

The gliss line might be correct but I don't like how does it look like, ... kinda confusing with the staff lines, I'll try a grosser line with a heavier angle, no matter if is a half step only.

I just recalled I have the score of gruppen by stockhausen, I may take a look to it, it is like a dicctionary of weird stuff

Black Orpheus may have misunderstood the desired effect, but he nevertheless raised a valid point: The notation you chose here is the common way of notating rhythmical "orientation-points" within played-through glissandi, so there -may- be the danger of people playing it as one long glissando, instead of articulating the rhythms.

I don't believe they will though, since if you wanted -that- effect, there would have been no point in the triplet divisions within the glissando. But to make sure they don't misunderstand it, you could do two things:

You could write "quasi gliss." instead of "gliss." to make it clear that you aren't looking for one normal, played-through glissando.

And you could write some sort of articulation on top of all the notes, including the ones without noteheads. That will make it clear that all notes are to be articulated. You may not want to go for staccato dots or accents, since that may not be the sound you are going for, but maybe one of the more subtle articulations is fitting? Tenuto marks maybe, or louré (tenuto plus staccato dot) or a portato (staccato dot plus slur)? Using any articulation of this sort will give the players a much better idea of how to play and do away with some possible confusion.

As for the horns: Semitone glissandi are usually easily doable, but they will almost always involve closing and opening the bell with your hand to some degree (unless you want to make the glissandi with half-valves or similar, but the outcome of that depends a lot on the particular instrument). Normally, the hornist will play the higher of the two notes normally and close the bell gradually to go down to the lower note. This will make the tone quality change as well! The tone of the lower note (Bb in your case) will then be significantly damped and darkened, so you'll need to be aware of that. Depending on the exact register, the horns tuning and the size of the glissando interval it may even be necessary to move the hand all the way to stopping fully. In that case, it may be best to actually indicate a movement between an open and a stopped sound alongside the glissando.

Doing small glissandi with the lips works to some degree, but only really effectively in the very low register. And even there it's much harder to control than when you're doing the glissandi with the hand in the bell. (Of course, lip-bending is often used alongside the hand-in-bell-movements, to some degree. But you don't need to worry about the exact performance here. That's the hornist's problem. As long as it IS doable, of course.)

Look I wouldn't want to use articulations on the gliss notes because that would make them different from the others and I don't want a sort of accent on those notes, they all must be equal ..

I've made some other options (see the new pic attached in this post)

About the gliss in the Horn, I'd like to ask for an specific technique instead leaving it open to the player skill ... or what is better ?

The gliss with the Bell, how muted would sound the "taken-down" note (Bb) ? ... I'd prefer not to notate any gliss instead having differences on the notes... you see, I want homogeneous sound throught the entire opening if this 5th mov....

Will the bell-closing method make the horns sections rise on the B (bars 2,4,6,8) and kinda hide on the Bb (bars 3,5,7,9) ?

Remember everyone's playing on fff ... is the lip-bending comfortable ?

See the attached PDF of the Full score to note which B-Bb (in treble clef) I'm asking and all the context ... and Listen here (I give you the LastFM link in case the YC network doesn't work for you)

(Glad to see you're back,I though you were also leaving YC )

I think I like "Symbol Gliss" the best. It's very clear as to what you're expecting.

Look I wouldn't want to use articulations on the gliss notes because that would make them different from the others and I don't want a sort of accent on those notes, they all must be equal ..

I didn't mean just on the gliss notes. What I was thinking of was figuring an articulation that would fit for -all- notes and write it.

About the gliss in the Horn, I'd like to ask for an specific technique instead leaving it open to the player skill ... or what is better ?

Well, in most cases it will be a slight combination of hand-in-bell-movement and lip-bending, with 80%-90% of that being hand-in-bell-movement. This depends a lot on the exact notes, the horn and the hornist of course. If you indicate no technique, that's what you'll get. If you indicate -only- hand-in-bell-movement, that's fine, but you won't hear an audible difference to the variant where a little lip bending is added as well, except that the hornist may not be able to reach the full semitone. So I wouldn't recommend that. Lip-bending alone won't be sufficient for those tones, so that's ruled out too. So either you leave it open and get the combination I described above (or write "with the right hand" to make it clear), OR you specifically ask for using half-valves, which will give you a totally different sound.

The gliss with the Bell, how muted would sound the "taken-down" note (Bb) ? ... I'd prefer not to notate any gliss instead having differences on the notes... you see, I want homogeneous sound throught the entire opening if this 5th mov....

Will the bell-closing method make the horns sections rise on the B (bars 2,4,6,8) and kinda hide on the Bb (bars 3,5,7,9) ?

Remember everyone's playing on fff ... is the lip-bending comfortable ?

If you use the hand in the bell to move down a full semitone the sound will definitely not be homogenous. Yes, the Bb will also be significantly quieter that way. Lip-bending will help almost nothing, ESPECIALLY in fff. In a relatively high register and loud volume, the only differences you'll be able to make with the lips are microtonal. In fff this is reduced to almost nothing. So, as mentioned, you'll have to choose between hand-movements (with minimal help from the lips) and half-valves. BOTH will affect the sound quite a bit. The difference is this however: Hand-movement will change the sound pretty much gradually from the open B to the muted Bb. So you'll always have an open sounding bar, then a transition to a more muffled one, then again a transition to an open one etc.

With half-valves, both the B and the Bb will sound quite as strongly and openly. HOWEVER, the glissando in between them (where valves will be half-pressed) will sound VERY different. It can be a nice effect really, but it may not be what you want.

Also: half-valves usually don't work on instruments with rotary valves as well as on piston valves. This means that on most horns (contrary to trumpets, vienna horns, etc.), the hornist will have difficulties pulling them off (because the two positions of the valve are spaced really closely, requiring only minimal finger movement). That depends a lot on the exact horn though. Some valve-keys move over a greater distance than others, making half-valves much more controllable. (On my own horn, they are thankfully rather easily doable, for instance.)

All in all, I only suggest using half-valves if you know how it will turn out. (If you know a hornist you can try it out with - great!) Otherwise, using hand-movements is a safer bet. But as I said: The sound WILL change a lot between the two notes. Horn-glissandi that don't involve changes in timbre are almost impossible, in most cases.

So if you DO want to have a homogenous sound, instead of using glissando, I recommend using microtonal steps. Writing a progression from B over a quartertone flat B to a Bb is totally feasible, or even a progression from B over a sixth-tone flat B to a sixth-tone high Bb to a B. It will require a little experimentation on the hornists part to figure out the proper fingerings, but then it shouldn't be any problem. And in the whole tutti sound, it will sound almost the same as your glissando.

Note: Microtonal steps are the easier the higher up they are in the horn's register. Between the B and Bb of Horns 1 and two, it will be possible to add two or three steps inbetween. For horns 3/4 who are playing an octave lower however, that's somewhat harder, but with a bit of right-hand-tricksing it can be accomplished as well. I'd also consider writing the microtonal jumps at slightly different points for all horns. For example, have horn 1 move down a quartertone after the first note, while the other horns still stay on the original note. One note later, you move down with horn 2, then horn 3, then maybe another quartertone lower with horn 1, then with horn 4, then with horn 2 again, then 3, then 4. Or whatever. Just make the steps slightly unsynchronized between the horn, and you'll get the impression of a somewhat unsharp, but relatively smooth downwards glissando. (Which you'd get with a normal glissando as well, as every musician would do the glissando at a slightly different rate.)

Example:

(Please excuse the ugly spacing of the accidentals and such…)

(Glad to see you're back,I though you were also leaving YC)

Yes, I had a busy time lately, but now I'm back!

I think I like "Symbol Gliss" the best. It's very clear as to what you're expecting.

I tend to agree. Personally I'd consider writing normal sized notes though, instead of the smaller ones. The smaller ones might be mistaken for "optional notes".

I've got a similar problem: I want to write a glissando with a length of 5/32. I'd like to ask if anybody here knows a common way before inventing something that is hard to understand.

I've got a similar problem: I want to write a glissando with a length of 5/32. I'd like to ask if anybody here knows a common way before inventing something that is hard to understand.

Well, that depends a lot on where those 5/32nds are in respect to the beats. If you told us the exact rhythm of that bar, it would be easier to tell. In many setups it wouldn't require any other notation than any other glissando.

But since you're asking, I assume that you have a setup where a special notation is required to make it clear. In this case, this is exactly the kind of thing Black Orpheus mentioned: Using stems without noteheads to indicate rhythmic orientation points within a glissando.

Example:

Alright, thanks :)

Thanks Garderner for you wide explanation..

I think I like the microtonal things, at least that wouldn't affect the Bb, the horninst may play the quarter flat by closing the bell, or half-valves but is very clear that the upcomming Bb has to be played in normal fashion, the possible tricks are for the B quarter flat, only.

Mutting the sound within the glissando and maintain it that way until the next gliss, to go back to the normal sound... that's out of quesition, I think we forget that.

The way you wrote the quarter flats at different moments in the 4 horns, loos clever and due to you play horn and I don't I will follow your advise.

Is just that now we have 2 ways to write the gliss, one for the Trombones and 1 for the horns...

To avoid making all this a too large discussion and too hesitating, I think my call will be to use the "SymbolGliss" for the trombones and your quarter flats method for the horns (in the strings I will use the SymbolGilss too) I will remove the small notes, it was pointless ....

I posted this thread because I though it might be already an specific way to notate this and I wanted to know but it seems is not clear yet, is open for options, so i think IS TIME to "invent" or define all this no ?

I'm glad you found a solution then. It really -does- make sense to notate such things differently for horns than for trombones, for instance. Glissandi are one of the most idiomatic things for instruments like trombones and bowed string instruments (for which discrete steps could be seen as much more "artificial"), whereas the build of the horn clearly favours discrete steps. Trying to find a notation that works equally well for all instruments may actually take away your possibility to play with the strengths of the individual instruments.

I posted this thread because I though it might be already an specific way to notate this and I wanted to know but it seems is not clear yet, is open for options, so i think IS TIME to "invent" or define all this no ?

It certainly would be nice to have certain standards concerning the notation of some contemporary/extended techniques. It would make communication with performers a lot more effective. The problem is that, although many have tried, new standards can't be just decided upon, since there is no authority that really could define such things for everyone. So the only thing one can really do is trying to find a good solution for oneself, and if others see this and agree that it's a good notation for this particular thing, maybe over time certain notational standards will develop. This has of course already happened with lots of the new 20th century/contemporary techniques. Sure, there are still various different ways of writing, say, quartertones or clusters, but some forms of them are now very widespread and are pretty much universally understood by today's performers.

Of course, just notating stuff in a way that makes sense to you is only one part of all this. The other would be going out and reading lots of scores of other composer, in order to be able to see the solutions they've come up with and maybe imitate that, if it makes sense.

Well now we're having some success with strange gliss notations perhaps we could solve one gliss I have planed for a violin concert (in a far future)

Is inspired on a Bird singing, a bird I've heard many times because is easy to find it here in Mexico...

I found this video.. the gliss appears on 0:03 to 0:10 ... (in real life is much clear)

The Bird name is "Clarin" or Jilguero" (I think is "Jilguero" because we had a "Clarin" at home and wasn't like that the singing)

I made a quick recording score of the possible violin part...

Listen the Violin Part here

and the score is attached.

Tough task eh ?

Well, first of all I'm a bit confused about the frequency marks in your score. You start with "A=1320" and end with "A=1050", which is a slightly wide major third. In a normal tuning (A~440) these frequencies would be about E6 and C6 respectively. In your sound example however, the violin only goes down about a semitone. So which is it that you want?

Aside from that: Don't use frequencies to designate notes, and even less so call these frequencies an "A". Writing A=somefrequency only makes sense when you're actually asking the violinist to detune the violin. Of course you can also make glissando with the tuning pegs, but in this case that won't work, because the violinist won't have a free hand with the bowing and fingering necessary in this part. Also, frequency values aren't helpful to the average musician, as a musician's typical training will let her or him know whether he's playing an "A" or a "D#" in that particular tuning and whether it's slightly sharp, or quartertone flat etc. - but she or he won't usually know the frequency of the played tone.

Now, I'm not sure whether the following is the optimal solution, it's just the first thing I thought of:

(The F# in brackets at the end is an example assuming you -do- want to move down a full third. Use whatever note you want to arrive on.)

And, on the bottom of the page a note like this:

* While playing this figure, gradually slide downwards,

so that by the end of the fourth measure all notes sound

a major third lower than written. (E.g. the final note A should

sound as a F#, as indicated by the note in brackets.)

After this, continue playing as written (without transposition).

And, to make sure there is no confusion afterwards, write "loco" above whatever follows:

You might also consider either adding further notes in brackets to show the sounding notes at certain points, for example for the first notes in every measure.

Or you could split it up in four parts, each one measure long, each one written, say, a semitone lower than the previous one and each one with the glissando mark above it. (While keeping the verbal note on the bottom of the page, of course.) But maybe that's too cluttered and unnecessary.

Maybe you can come up with a much better solution though. But I'd strictly advise against using frequencies. Use written notes or note names instead. And however you do it, I'd definitly make a verbal note to clarify what you are looking for.

Yes the aditional note with a short explanation (like the one you wrote) will be indispensable,

Lastnight I had a sort of brainstorm about this notation, was to create the notes gradually going down, it might be a brilliant idea but this morning when I tried to do it was terribly difficult.

It can be appressiated with Big zoom but not in a small view...

The 1st staff is normal,

The 2nd has the notes in the same position but I use a hidden staff and I draw the 5 lines as separate objects with an accending angle to create the effect that notes are each time in a lower position.

the 3rd has the normal staff but I inserted each note one by one as Symbol and with gradually getting down positions, but there's no Symbols with merged ties so they look ugly one by one... (it takes a lot of time)

in all cases the line indicating the Pitch Glissando is the only thing clarifies all this....

I'd find both 2 and 3 somewhat confusing if I was to perform this. Those notes might appear to be just "improperly notated" instead of understanding the graphical meaning, if I looked at this. Staff lines and ledger lines are meant to be a harmonical grid, and moving noteheads slightly off this grid will almost always give an unclear impression. So -if- you want to move the notes graphically down, I suggest removing the staff entirely after the first few notes and then only have it set in again for the last couple of notes. Also, remove all ledger lines. That way, the general shape of the figure will still be visible, but of course you may not get exact intervals. But I think you have to decide between either going for something as vague as this, or keeping the notes strictly on the staff and verbally describe the downwards glissando (as in your example 1).

I'm not a fan of any of the examples in your new image. (Why do loco and 8va appear at the same time?) You could keep everything on the staff and use quarter-tone accidentals. 48 notes and you want to move down 3 half steps, or 6 quarter steps. So every 8 notes you can notate down a quarter step, except have the last note notated as F#. Perhaps this is not ideal conceptually, but it should give you what you want in the performance, especially since it's so fast.

The loco ? actually I forgot to put it, and then I read what Gardener said and I open the jpg and added the text in the place i found space ... it suppose to be in a better position, and "Loco" is about the way to play it, like a crazy rubato.

Yeah the notes in 2dn and 3th staves look confusing .... removing the staff lines is an interesting option, I've seen that used in Aleathorian (random) music to indicate that notes must be played in the indicated up/down intervals but without specifying which ones... I just don't trust the Aleathorian music because you never know what madness will the player do..

I think the normal notation + the gliss line going down + the Note explaining how to play it is a good option...

Anyway I won't use this thing in a close future project..

Also I noted is not always a going down gliss, yesterday I heard one of these bird doing it in going up mode... I think has to do with the bird's mood

The loco ? actually I forgot to put it, and then I read what Gardener said and I open the jpg and added the text in the place i found space ... it suppose to be in a better position, and "Loco" is about the way to play it, like a crazy rubato.

Oh! That's funny since loco can also be a cancellation of 8va. Loco as a playing description should probably go above the staff, but I'd consider using a different word if you have it near the 8va!