as much as possible in the space between the staves. You may beautify it further by taking care that the beam placement follows the musical line of both hands (for example: the beam jumping upwards between 3rd and 4th beats of the 1st bar is not helpful for reading, as the RH is not moving) and also by keeping the beams a bit closer to the LH stave, i.e. This is the preferred cross-staff notation, as stated by Knut. Even more so because, if using 8va, you would correctly have to place 8va lines over both staves (also the left hand stave!), which will make the space between the staves look quite crowded if the beams are between the staves as well.Ģ.
Octo's example does not go beyond 4 ledger lines, so I would prefer it without 8va, just like it stands now. So only from 5th or 6th ledger line onwards I would prefer the notation with 8va. I don't mind the occasional 5th ledger line either. In my opinion (as a pianist), 8va lines are not necessary for up to 4 ledger lines above or below. Centered beams is the most (and only?) appropriate cross-staff notation for notes alternating between the hands.ġ. While 8va indications might compromise the direction to a certain degree, they are completely standard in piano music, and completely appropriate for long passages like this.Ģ. If some passages in the piece feature notes in the first octave, I would omit the 8va for those. I would use 8va for this entire line, which should make the direction just as clear, while avoiding entire passages of notes 'floating' above the staves. For pianists: is this to quick? Would moving hands one octave apart be helpful, or there is no difference in performance? Is there any problem with RH/LH or LH/RH would be better?ġ. Is it OK to use that way cross-staff, or cross-staff with beams on one side (not between) should be better?ģ.
Is it OK to use so high octave, without 8va? The line moves quickly between low and high notes: without 8va it is obvious the direction.Ģ. This example is very quick = 160 or more. If only a text marking of "8va 2nd time" we're put above a section of piano music, it wouldn't be clear if this applies to both staves or just one.Here I face numerous questions. Piano, harp and other keyboard instruments, on the other hand, are examples of instruments using two staves in this case you need to use a dotted line to make it clear which stave has the octave adjusted. This is the case for most instruments in a score. If it is not clear when the player should return to playing at pitch, for instance if it is not simply after the repeated section, you use the term loco to show that the music is to played at the written pitch.Īlso, to answer your additional question, the markings above would be understood to only apply to one instrument, and so one stave, in a score, if the instrument only uses a single stave. Having said that, it is often useful to use a short amount of text to make your meaning clear. However, this use of small or bracketed notes, for a change on a repeat, is fairly common, so the text may not be necessary. You could also then use text to be absolutely clear, for instance by adding something like "2nd time" above the first bracketed note.
If you only want a few notes in a part to be played an octave higher on a repeat, you could add these notes above the notes to be played the first time, and make the note size smaller or bracket the noteheads. You could use a dotted line to show the exact group of notes to be played an octave higher if necessary. Something like "8va 2nd time" at the beginning of the passage you want an octave higher, is perfectly clear. If a whole section of music in a particular part is to be played an octave higher when repeated, simply use text. There are a couple of ways to achieve this.
0 kommentar(er)
