Would someone mind checking this please (UPDATED)?

Theory and practice of composition and arranging for classical guitar, discussion of works in progress, etc.
Forum rules
III Our MP3, WMV, MOV, OGG, AVI, Authors' rights

Composers' Workshop
Theory and practice of composition and arranging for classical guitar, discussion of works in progress, etc.

Once you have subscribed to the 002 group, you can attach the following types of files to your messages:
Audio : .mp3 .ogg .wav .flac
Video : .avi .flv .mov .wmv
Score : .pdf .jpg .gif .png
Finale: .mus
stevel
Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Would someone mind checking this please (UPDATED)?

Post by stevel » Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:57 pm

Based on comments, I went back and added more fingering, and string numbers, which in addition to the performance note should give all the information necessary to play it in the positions I intend and to make use of the "moveable shape" principle.

I started to add "guide lines" but I was a little afraid they were starting to look a little too much like glissandi, and I think the fingering coupled with the string numbers make it obvious what's going on (or what's supposed to be going on).

Besides, I would expect anyone who ever performed this to have looked at it a couple of times and figured it out, rather than just sight reading it :-)

Updated attachment:
Whole Tone Prelude.pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by stevel on Sun Jun 03, 2018 4:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

musikai
Posts: 462
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 10:32 am
Location: Augsburg, Germany

Re: Would someone mind checking this please?

Post by musikai » Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:46 pm

I think it isn't obvious at first sight on which string to play the dyads and the harmonics. I just didn't see the text "at 10th fret". It's good to have it but it would make things easier to have clear indications in form of circled numbers for the strings. Definitely for the harmonic B on the 6th string.
Sagreras Gitarrenschule PDF
Free Project: LibreOffice Songbook Architect (LOSA)
See website link

stevel
Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: Would someone mind checking this please?

Post by stevel » Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:36 pm

musikai wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:46 pm
I think it isn't obvious at first sight on which string to play the dyads and the harmonics. I just didn't see the text "at 10th fret". It's good to have it but it would make things easier to have clear indications in form of circled numbers for the strings. Definitely for the harmonic B on the 6th string.
That's how I had it before...

Of course there was a lot more space then...

Maybe I'll reinclude them (hopefully some others will comment) and just have to respace the systems to fit everything in (note wasn't leaving them out just because of lack of space, just felt there might be a more effective way of doing it than what I had before).

User avatar
Stephen Kenyon
Teacher
Posts: 2840
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 11:26 am
Location: Dorchester, Dorset, England

Re: Would someone mind checking this please?

Post by Stephen Kenyon » Sat Jun 02, 2018 9:58 pm

Yes a string marking, just one is needed, and is better than (10th fret) because one is looking out for that kind of standard instruction, not that kind of text. One could also use a position marking of IX - which is implied.

Other things that brought me up short were the need to CIII in m8 etc - I'd put a preparatory CIII at the start of the measure.
I stumbled at m 9 thinking the C was meant to be on string 3 - putting that footnote is perfectly explanatory but the best is to aim to be sufficiently clear within the body of the music itself. In this kind of situation, where your fingering is sliding along, to put a little line indicating a guide finger movement - in this case it would be on the 4.
In m 17 I didn't read ahead enough to get the CII required, so again would add that at the start.
End of m 24 putting V is better than (5th fret).
Can't see the point in ending differently than mm 1-2 but if you want that, its clear enough, but more usual to put 'Art Harm' and maybe the string number to prevent misunderstanding it being on the B string - some harmonics are notated that way.

All above is as per my principle that what's best is what helps me sight read perfectly first time - not that I usually can, but the idea is the score helps rather than not.
Simon Ambridge Series 40 (2005)
Trevor Semple Series 88 (1992)
Louis Panormo (1838)
Alexander Batov Baroque Guitar (2013)
Simon Ambridge 'Hauser' (2018)

stevel
Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: Would someone mind checking this please?

Post by stevel » Sun Jun 03, 2018 2:24 am

Stephen Kenyon wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 9:58 pm
Yes a string marking, just one is needed, and is better than (10th fret) because one is looking out for that kind of standard instruction, not that kind of text. One could also use a position marking of IX - which is implied.

Other things that brought me up short were the need to CIII in m8 etc - I'd put a preparatory CIII at the start of the measure.
I stumbled at m 9 thinking the C was meant to be on string 3 - putting that footnote is perfectly explanatory but the best is to aim to be sufficiently clear within the body of the music itself. In this kind of situation, where your fingering is sliding along, to put a little line indicating a guide finger movement - in this case it would be on the 4.
In m 17 I didn't read ahead enough to get the CII required, so again would add that at the start.
End of m 24 putting V is better than (5th fret).
Can't see the point in ending differently than mm 1-2 but if you want that, its clear enough, but more usual to put 'Art Harm' and maybe the string number to prevent misunderstanding it being on the B string - some harmonics are notated that way.

All above is as per my principle that what's best is what helps me sight read perfectly first time - not that I usually can, but the idea is the score helps rather than not.
Thanks - I also had the "slide lines" (guide finger) between notes (which are easy enough to re-enter)!

I guess I went too far the wrong way in trying to "simplify" it.

Actually, when you're saying "CIII" I assume you mean Barre, but one doesn't "need" to do it, and "shouldn't" do it based on the given fingering and the performance note.

Back in 2015, someone said that it's not in fact an Artificial Harmonic (which is what I had before) it's just played with the plucking hand rather than the fretting hand, so is still an open string node so that would be incorrect notation as well.

User avatar
Stephen Kenyon
Teacher
Posts: 2840
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 11:26 am
Location: Dorchester, Dorset, England

Re: Would someone mind checking this please?

Post by Stephen Kenyon » Sun Jun 03, 2018 8:46 am

stevel wrote:
Sun Jun 03, 2018 2:24 am
...
I guess I went too far the wrong way in trying to "simplify" it.
Easily done! - one reason its difficult to proof read / edit one's own editing ...
stevel wrote:
Sun Jun 03, 2018 2:24 am
Actually, when you're saying "CIII" I assume you mean Barre, but one doesn't "need" to do it, and "shouldn't" do it based on the given fingering and the performance note.
So one doesn't! Guess point there is, a little fingering reminder would have saved this reader from error.
stevel wrote:
Sun Jun 03, 2018 2:24 am
Back in 2015, someone said that it's not in fact an Artificial Harmonic (which is what I had before) it's just played with the plucking hand rather than the fretting hand, so is still an open string node so that would be incorrect notation as well.
Well that's a moot point, but yes for clarity putting RH would clear it up, Btw I would do it at 19th fret - sounds the same, easier to get too, often gets hit more finely.

PS any reason you didn't use it as an opportunity to improve your Italian?
Simon Ambridge Series 40 (2005)
Trevor Semple Series 88 (1992)
Louis Panormo (1838)
Alexander Batov Baroque Guitar (2013)
Simon Ambridge 'Hauser' (2018)

stevel
Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: Would someone mind checking this please?

Post by stevel » Sun Jun 03, 2018 4:29 pm

Stephen Kenyon wrote:
Sun Jun 03, 2018 8:46 am

PS any reason you didn't use it as an opportunity to improve your Italian?
You mean for all the Tempo markings and such?

I tend to use English in most of my scores. I only use Italian for "standard words" like "dolce" or "pizz.", "loco", and so on. I'll even usually also put things like "always staccato" rather than "sempre staccato". But, if the piece is more traditional, or has a preponderance of those stock Italian terms, I may stick to Italian tempo markings and expressions just to keep it consistent within that piece.

Please check out the updated file in the OP and see if the fingering and string numbers clarify matters.

Thanks for all your help!

User avatar
Stephen Kenyon
Teacher
Posts: 2840
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 11:26 am
Location: Dorchester, Dorset, England

Re: Would someone mind checking this please (UPDATED)?

Post by Stephen Kenyon » Sun Jun 03, 2018 9:46 pm

stevel wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:57 pm
...
Besides, I would expect anyone who ever performed this to have looked at it a couple of times and figured it out, rather than just sight reading it...
Of course, but treat the concept of prima vista performance as guidance/aspiration, and you will tend to find it helps present a piece in the best way possible, even for solo pieces. Of course, its pretty much essential for any ensemble work, but then the point is, there is no particular difference in the principles involved in presenting solo and ensemble music.
Simon Ambridge Series 40 (2005)
Trevor Semple Series 88 (1992)
Louis Panormo (1838)
Alexander Batov Baroque Guitar (2013)
Simon Ambridge 'Hauser' (2018)

stevel
Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: Would someone mind checking this please (UPDATED)?

Post by stevel » Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:00 pm

Stephen Kenyon wrote:
Sun Jun 03, 2018 9:46 pm
stevel wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:57 pm
...
Besides, I would expect anyone who ever performed this to have looked at it a couple of times and figured it out, rather than just sight reading it...
Of course, but treat the concept of prima vista performance as guidance/aspiration, and you will tend to find it helps present a piece in the best way possible, even for solo pieces. Of course, its pretty much essential for any ensemble work, but then the point is, there is no particular difference in the principles involved in presenting solo and ensemble music.
Any thoughts on the updated version Stephen?

Thanks,
Steve

User avatar
Stephen Kenyon
Teacher
Posts: 2840
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 11:26 am
Location: Dorchester, Dorset, England

Re: Would someone mind checking this please (UPDATED)?

Post by Stephen Kenyon » Mon Jun 04, 2018 7:07 pm

stevel wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:00 pm
Stephen Kenyon wrote:
Sun Jun 03, 2018 9:46 pm
stevel wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:57 pm
...
Besides, I would expect anyone who ever performed this to have looked at it a couple of times and figured it out, rather than just sight reading it...
Of course, but treat the concept of prima vista performance as guidance/aspiration, and you will tend to find it helps present a piece in the best way possible, even for solo pieces. Of course, its pretty much essential for any ensemble work, but then the point is, there is no particular difference in the principles involved in presenting solo and ensemble music.
Any thoughts on the updated version Stephen?
Well I didn't trip up anywhere but then it wasn't prima vista anymore. I'd still be tempted to add the occasional reminder to give certainty. Was also wondering what RH pattern you had in mind?
Simon Ambridge Series 40 (2005)
Trevor Semple Series 88 (1992)
Louis Panormo (1838)
Alexander Batov Baroque Guitar (2013)
Simon Ambridge 'Hauser' (2018)

stevel
Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: Would someone mind checking this please (UPDATED)?

Post by stevel » Thu Jun 07, 2018 6:42 pm

Stephen Kenyon wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 7:07 pm

Well I didn't trip up anywhere but then it wasn't prima vista anymore. I'd still be tempted to add the occasional reminder to give certainty. Was also wondering what RH pattern you had in mind?
Thanks Stephen, that's good news.

RH is a good question.

I don't really know.

I've been "double stroking" the upper note, so M-I-M M-I-M etc. (or A-M-A) for each group of 3 8ths.

The other one that "feels" OK and seems logical is M-I-A M-I-A etc.

Despite the latter seeming "more correct" to me in terms of technique, the former is easier for me to do.

I was thinking to leave it up to the performer. Wisdom?

Steve

Return to “Composers' Workshop”