Tricky notation
Hello,
Is it possible in Musescore to reproduce the notation seen in the second measure in the attached screenshot (the two measures follow one another in the score)?
Downloadable scores available online use the simplified and inaccurate notation shown in the first sample in the attached .mscz file.
And the only way I've been able to produce a more "accurate" version is by adding a third voice, with the unpleasant result seen in the second sample.
Is there a better way to do it? Thanks for any advice.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| screenshot.51.jpg | 86.04 KB |
| Sample1.mscz | 26.36 KB |
Comments
Sorry, I should have included another measure in the screenshot. Here's a better version
Look in the Handbook for Voices and Cross-staff notation:
https://musescore.org/en/handbook/4/working-multiple-voices
https://musescore.org/en/handbook/4/cross-staff-notation
In reply to Look in the Handbook for… by underquark
Thank you for your help, underquark. I've read those two sections, but I don't think they solve my "problem".
The screenshot I uploaded is from an Edition Peters solo piano score in 6/8 time, so I'm assuming it shows what the composer actually wrote and wanted. The C4 after the initial semiquaver (or 16th note) rest is three separate notes—a semiquaver (downward stem), a quaver (upward stem) and a dotted minim (half note)—which could be interpreted as belonging to three separate "voices".
But the quaver isn't really part of a voice at all, and the dotted minim exceeds the length of the measure, given that it's preceded by a 16th note rest. Yet it seems to be impossible to enter the multiple notes on C4 in Musescore without adding extra voices.
So if the Edition Peters notation sort of "breaks the rules", is there any way I can break the rules in Musescore to reproduce that notation?
Attached is a slightly clearer version of the printed score.
In reply to Thank you for your help,… by bolldamm
Voices and cross staff notation is still the answer to the problem
In reply to Voices and cross staff… by Jojo-Schmitz
Thank you, Jojo. I'll keep trying. But I don't see how cross-staff notation will help me create a voice that has a sixteenth note rest followed by a dotted half note in one measure with a 6/8 time signature, since you can't get 13 sixteenth notes in a measure. I'd need some kind of "cross-measure" notation!
In reply to Thank you, Jojo. I'll keep… by bolldamm
I did this (in Mu3)
![Unbenannt.png]()
In reply to I did this (in Mu3) [inline… by Jojo-Schmitz
Thank you, Jojo, but the printed score is definitely what the composer (Brahms, Op 76, No 1) intended, as oonline recordings confirm. The tied C4 is not played on the first beat of the bar but after the low C in the bass, i.e. simultaneously with the C4 that starts the run of semiquavers.
In reply to Thank you, Jojo, but the… by bolldamm
You could make the measure longer by 1/16, and hide the trailing 16th rest(s)
In reply to You cam make the measure… by Jojo-Schmitz
That works! Thank you, Jojo. I didn't realise that was possible, since I'd never seen the measure properties window (I thought the Properties in the Inspector were the only ones I could edit).
In reply to Thank you for your help,… by bolldamm
"So if the Edition Peters notation sort of "breaks the rules", is there any way I can break the rules in Musescore to reproduce that notation?"
I'm not convinced that you should try to do this. Surely the Peters edition is wrong to place the first dotted minim after the start of the measure, because that suggests at first glance that the note is not played on the very first beat?
![Peters_edition.png]( "Peters_edition.png")
[EDIT] I think that the only reason Peters placed the initial dotted minim to the right was to avoid the tie crossing stems of intermediate notes:
MuseScore's layout is more correct, because the notes which sound simultaneously on beat 1 of measure 1 are aligned vertically:
![Cross-staff_with_Voices.png]( "Cross-staff_with_Voices.png")
In reply to "So if the Edition Peters… by DanielR
Hi, Daniel, The dotted minim is definitely played after the C2 in the bass, as written in the printed score and as can be heard in online recording of this piece (Brahms, Op 76 No 1). So although the Edition Peters score may not "make sense", it does seem to be what the composer intended. I just wanted to know whether there's any way to do this in Musescore?
In reply to Hi, Daniel, The dotted minim… by bolldamm
No, this is obviously a publisher's mistake. The fact of publication does not mean that it's "what the composer wanted". If there are recordings with a pause there, these are conductors' mistakes in not noticing the publisher's mistake. The first measure is supposed to be timed just like the second: dotted half falling on the downbeat and the sixteenth run on the "e" of "1". As DanielR suggested, the publisher did it that way "to avoid the tie crossing stems of intermediate notes".
Yes, MuseScore can do it as it's published, but I would bet any amount of money that Brahms would complain vociferously. I "would" put money on it if it were possible to determine an answer, but since Brahms isn't around to ask, there is no way. Doesn't mean that the publisher's mistake is not obvious.
OK, so I am not a piano player, nor a fan of reproducing a score just the way some publisher did it. So please feel free to disregard the following.
Publishers get to print all kinds of things that we mere mortals can't. It also depends on if we want playback or not. In this few measures we have several times when (maybe) three different note values happen on the same pitch at the same time. This is complicated by the Pedal marks. In some respects, the Pedal negates the note values. Yes, there may be subtleties of playing that may bring them out. But still. This can be done on one staff.
In reply to OK, so I am not a piano… by bobjp
I agree, bobjp, I just wanted to know know whether this can be done in Musescore or not. If it can't, no problem.
In reply to I agree, bobjp, I just… by bolldamm
With Jojo's tip, I've discovered it can be done – by extending the duration of the measure by one 16th note.
In reply to With Jojo's tip, I've… by bolldamm
It can be done without altering the whole measure, though the original looks wrong to me, too.
![Screenshot_20241109_185218.png]( "Screenshot_20241109_185218.png")
In reply to Yeah, that's not necessary. … by underquark
Wow, that's clever, so you enter the run of semiquavers as a voice in the bass and override the visual duration of the dotted note. I would never have worked that out! Thank you.
I have spent way more time on this than it is worth to me. But I have a few more observations.
I looked a several printed copies of this, including an 1879 first edition. All have the dotted note after the 16th rest.
The few recordings I listened to play it that way.
Piano players have pointed out to me, in the past, that there are some instances where it is common for them and their printed music to bend the rules. They know what the dotted note placed where it is, means.
I noticed that most editions had almost no pedal markings. Performers tend to do what they want anyway, as well.
And the OP has a way to make it work.
Thank you to all the commenters, I've learned a lot from your replies. Including that Musescore has the flexibility to reproduce even unconventional notation like this without disabling automatic placement or anything like that, as discussed in the past!