[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Section repeat
From: |
Hans Åberg |
Subject: |
Re: Section repeat |
Date: |
Sat, 4 Feb 2017 10:38:16 +0100 |
Yt was David Wright who wrote what you quote, not me.
> On 4 Feb 2017, at 01:58, Flaming Hakama by Elaine <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 1:12 PM, [David Wright <address@hidden>] wrote:
>
> > Comparing yesterday's version (2 and 4 separate) and A (2&4 together),
> > I'd maintain that A describes the music more faithfully, and is
> > actually easier to read: when you reach 15 on the 4th-time through,
> > you've not only played all the measures involved, but you only have
> > to vault over one volta bracket, not two.
>
> The counterpoint to this insight is that with the combined ending, players
> must read the same symbol (the end repeat barline) and interpret it
> differently different times--the first time they encounter it (2nd ending),
> take the repeat, and the second time they encounter it (4th ending), they
> ignore it.
>
> Especially since there are more than 2 repeats, and this occurrence is
> separated by a 3rd ending, you can introduce more work to the musicians to
> remember where they are and what to do when they get to that measure.
>
> With the separate endings, there is less confusion about the roadmap.
>
> So, I think there are benefits and drawbacks to each approach.
- Re: Section repeat, (continued)
Re:Section repeat, Flaming Hakama by Elaine, 2017/02/02
Re: Section repeat, Flaming Hakama by Elaine, 2017/02/03
Re: Section repeat, Flaming Hakama by Elaine, 2017/02/03