Kathleen
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I would probably place it at the bottom of the braille page like a music footnote, especially if it's a footnote to the music heading (meter, tempo, key, etc). Even if it is for the title or composer, I think consistency is best in the music format.
I hope that helps!
Kathleen
Is there a preface to the edition that explains the symbol? I’ve never seen it before -
if you choose to use a special note head symbol, be sure it’s not one that you’re using anywhere else.
As far as the tenor clef symbol, I would treat it the same as the treble clef and add it in where you add in the other clefs.Hi Martin,
Good question - While MBC2015 doesn't specify that the start of multiple interval doublings must be started at the same point, I tend to air on the side of clarity and not double a new interval while in the midst of another doubled interval.
The Introduction to Music Braille Transcription, 2nd edition by DeGarmo, advises that "it is better not to double more than one interval, unless the doubling begins and ends simultaneously for all the intervals..." (pg 360)
So while there is no rule that says you can't, remember that even the procedure of doubling is not required - we MAY chose to use doubling if it remains clear and is truly helpful. Once you start doubling multiple intervals, the complexity could very quickly outweigh the benefit of the procedure. It's not always about just saving space - it's about making the music easy to memorize and perform/study.
Hope that helps!
Kathleen
I usually use the 128th-note fractioning symbol after the note, dots 45, 3, since the z is representing a very fast repetition of the note. Be sure to list it on the special symbols page.
Please forgive the tardiness of this reply. There is a glitch in the system and I'm not receiving alerts that there are questions. My sincerely apologies.
Kathleen
You are correct. There must be a blank cell aligned between all lines of the parallel to show the measure division. The second version in the attachment is correct.
I apologize for the tardiness of this reply. There is a glitch in the system and I'm not receiving these messages. Please forgive me.
Kathleen
I think using the RH sign and intervals would be acceptable. You may want to include a quick TN if this is the first (or only) time it will be used. But I'm imagining this might be at the start of the piano method book in which case introducing the hand signs would be appropriate.
If however, it's part of a book for a single line instrument and intervals are few and far between, using an in-accord may be clearer. (I'm partial to piano format when piano music occurs, but it really is a matter of context.)
Hope that helps!
Hi there!
Apologies for the delay - there is an issue with the site and it is not alerting me to posts that appear here!
The way you have Brailled this example with the repeats is 100% correct! (Be sure to remove the extra 4th octave indicator on measure 7 if you chose to retain the repeats.)
Kathleen
You could do either open score or piano (all intervals read upward) with solo line.
If you have other pieces (such as the Bach you asked me about) that are in the same volume, I'd use a similar format for each if possible. The important thing is to be consistent. If you have multiple formats, just include a TN before the example saying which format you're using.
Hi Robert,
Apologies for the late reply.
I usually do open score for analyses like this.
You can label the parts SATB or two right hands and two left hands or two treble clefs and two bass clefs. Your choice - just be consistent!
Kathleen
Hello Robert,
It's quite unorthodox to mix the choral format with the piano format - I wouldn't attempt that, actually. I would treat the upper line labeled voice as a single part with the "tenor," "do," "alto," "mi" etc. as word sign expressions before the notes to which they apply.
Unless this is specifically meant to be sung by a choir with each person taking a separate note, I wouldn't try to turn it into a choir piece. It's more comprehensible to describe in a short TN before the example that the part labeled voice is transcribed as the right hand and then explain what you're doing with the text/labels.
If you feel you must transcribe it as individual voices with added rests, you'll need to treat the whole thing as ensemble format, not a blend of piano and choir. You can find the format description in MBC2015 Section 33. If this is the way you're going to go, also refer to section 38 and use the solfège syllables as text rather than placing them underneath the parallel.
I think just doing it as piano format is cleaner, but it's hard to judge without knowing the context of this particular example.
Hope that helps!
Kathleen
Thanks for your patience, Robert.
I've attached a brf with my transcription of these 5 measures.
I would include a lengthy TN at the start (I'm sure you've got one going already!) to explain that the music is mostly unmeasured, and as such you will be aligning notes vertically to follow the print placement of chords and musical events within the measure. I would NOT add rests and attempt to figure out on which beat a chord would fall in an unmeasured piece like this.
So - in measure 1, I moved both footnote indicators to the start of the measure. Both hands have diamond shaped notes, so I indicated that in both parts. (I also fixed the first note of the left hand.) I aligned the notes vertically, along with their part-measure repetitions. Without some sort of alignment factor, the braille reader would not know that the diamond shaped whole notes and the diamond shaped quarter notes were to be played simultaneously. (I toyed with using coincidence signs, but the vertical alignment was better for the rest of the piece, so I went with that throughout.)
I left blank lines between parallels for clarity.
Measure 2 - I expanded the parallel to three lines and aligned the musical "events" vertically, using guide dots where necessary. For the wavy line that means "let die away", instead of using a footnote, I created a symbol which, set apart by blank cells, now means "let die away." I listed it in the SS list. As you'll see in measure 5, I use the same figure but lengthened it, to represent the longer wavy line. I think the vertical alignment of the chords is clearer that adding rests which don't really make sense in this rhythmically ambiguous piece.
Measure 3 - same as measure 2 basically.
Measure 4 - easy! Actually metered so it's quite straightforward. I decided vertical alignment was not necessary here, though it would certainly be ok to do so to maintain consistency.
Measure 5 - I used the x-shaped notehead to represent the knock symbol (and defined it in the SS list.) Even though we are still in 4/8 theoretically, I vertically aligned the events to make it very clear. I don't think added rests are needed. I divided the measure after the left hand knock. Notice the longer wavy line in the right hand.
Let me know what you think about these solutions. Also - could you let me know which piece this is? This would make a great bulletin article topic!
Thanks!
Kathleen
Robert,
Thanks for the good question!
It's my opinion that the different key signatures would prevent us from being able to combine the hands and reducing the parallel. Imagine how hard that would be to remember which hand is playing and which notes are sharped vs which are natural.
I believe following the method in 6.5.1-1 would be appropriate. And since the RH has no accidentals in the signature, you could just list the left hand. I don't think you need to do anything different that listing the usual 5# signature after the LH sign, even though the F# is on the first space of the treble staff, they are still in the usual order.
Hope that helps. And as always, if you feel like more clarity is needed, you can always add a sentence on your TN page about being aware that the hands may have different key signatures.
