Multi-voice hidden rests advice please!
Hi All, another request for your collective wisdom - it's been a long time since I looked closely at guitar scores.
Screenshot below - Is this acceptable practice? Trying to keep the score as clean as possible so the rests greyed will be hidden of course in print and PDF. I chose to tie the low E in the 3rd bar as I felt that 2 minims in a row would be confusing. Otherwise using two voices to get the ringing notes rather than laissez etc.
Thanks
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Screenshot 2021-09-08 at 15.11.13.png | 18.37 KB |
Comments
Make sure all staves start with using voice 1, never ever leave voice 1 empty.
Here it seems to be voice 1 rests, they should better get shown, else those measures look like 5/4, esp. as the stems point the wrong way too
In reply to Make sure all staves start… by Jojo-Schmitz
hmm yes I guess. Maybe I'm better off just scoring in one voice, and letting most guitarists knowledge / common practice let ring appropriately.
Any guitarists want to chip in here?
In reply to hmm yes I guess. Maybe I'm… by [DELETED] 37205164
"Any guitarists want to chip in here?"
Why not! But please, attach the real score (or, the involved excerpt, via menu File/ Save selection), not an image. It's easier and faster to reply and assist you.
In reply to "Any guitarists want to chip… by cadiz1
OK here you go. So I've removed the separate voices. Unsure whether to go that route or let a guitarist recognise ringing arps and chords when he/she sees them!
In reply to OK here you go. So I've… by [DELETED] 37205164
I took a quick look, but I would do something like this: 1Lamplighter.mscz
I.e. some basses in Voice 2 (to better define them, and allow clear holding of those notes), and the addition of fingerings.
To go through with my idea, I would remove all the string numbers (possibly keep a minimum). That is: 2Lamplighter.mscz
Indeed, I would much rather indicate the position with Roman numerals, and fingerings.
Your way of indicating string numbers, systematically, without any other indication (fingerings, position) is unusual if not more so in published scores.
In reply to I took a quick look, but I… by cadiz1
Thanks cadiz1! That is extremely helpful.
I dug out some old Trinity College Grade 6 pieces I had and was surprised to find quite a few inconsistencies in the markings. Some had just many strings marked and no fingering (or very little) some had all strings, fingering and positions, and some a mixture. So your guidance here is invaluable to me. I shall endeavour to use your helpful suggestions to make my scores more legible. Returning to the two voices and having rests allows me to change those opening bars to a minim - which also tidies up the rests. I think I'd forgotten just how cluttered a guitar score invariably looks when proper voicing, strings, positions and fingerings are used! But in order to make my scores as "professional" as possible, you are completely right in your suggestions.
thanks again for taking the time.
PS which part of France are you in? I live in central Brittany.
In reply to Thanks cadiz1! That is… by [DELETED] 37205164
"I think I'd forgotten just how cluttered a guitar score invariably looks when proper voicing, strings, positions and fingerings are used!"
Indeed, but it is not necessary (I did a bit of zealously on your file last night!) to systematically rewrite the fingerings and positions when the same passages/measures come back identically once or more, later in the score.
Once is enough, normally, because the guitarist is supposed to recognize these measures (😂) and therefore apply the same positions and fingerings (except of course, he decides to change the position to obtain a different tone, a different color, one of the guitar's particularities)
NB: I live in the West of France, a few miles from Les Sables d'Olonne ("Vendée Globe"... if that speaks to you?)