first - thx for your help - much
appreciated!
to clarify the context: it is 18th century, it is a "fantasy" -
and in other parts the stem direction clearly indicates the hand
like here:
I think I'll stick in this case with Simon and the New Bach
Edition..
But David, I'll clear up my \stemUp and Downs per your advice at
aother places in my code! Thx.
Joei
Am 04.05.2017 um 18:47 schrieb David Kastrup:
Simon Albrecht
<address@hidden> writes:
Am 04.05.2017 um 18:13 schrieb Johannes
Roeßler:
With the direction of the stems
indicating the hand
I think in order to really judge it one needs more context.
From what
time is the music, are you in touch with the composer, what
kind of
editorial policies are imposed, … ?
If it were 18th century music, the voice notation and stem
direction
would certainly not indicate hand distribution and turning the
lower
two voices into chords of one voice would be a sensible
editorial
decision (if I played it I’d probably distribute hands like
that).
If it were 18th century music, mushing together separate voices
into
chords would be a complete no-no. Even when played on a
simplistic
one-manual keyboard (or the new-fangled pianoforte), the player
would be
expected to keep the separate voices coherent or he could
without loss
be replaced with an automaton.
Come on, don’t exaggerate. If they’re written as chords, an
intelligent player like you envisage would still recognise them as
two voices and play them appropriately.
I’m very much in favour of sticking with the original notation,
but I agree with Urs that that’s not really feasible here. So you
have to die one death: either change stem direction, change
beaming, move it on two staves, interlock beams in a very
unpleasant way or write chords. The New Bach Edition for example
often went with the latter, because with up to five homophonic
voices on one staff not sharing any stems everything else is not
compatible with modern engraving.
Also, it depends on whether it’s a strict contrapunctal
composition like a fugue or not.
Best, Simon
|