On 2 Feb 2017, at 20:56, David Wright <address@hidden> wrote:
Yes, the idea was to just add "2x" to a repeat with two alternatives. How would that look, in your view?
Isn't there a danger that the "2x" will be seem as merely a redundant reinforcement of an ordinary repeat unless you mark the end of the second alternative.
It is ambiguous, indeed, in view of the alternatives.
Otherwise, I used the "1, 3", "2", "4" variation, which looks fine.
How good it looks might depend on the relative scale of the repeated section and the alternatives.
It is the second section here (cf. [1]). Normally, I would not bother write out exactly how many times a section is repeated, as it ad lib, and another requirement is that as the piece curiously exactly fills out one page, I did not want it to flow over.
|