Is the beaming of this score following a vocal practice or it is just outdated and obscuring the beat?Sources for sight-reading exercises that focus on subdivisions (emphasis on drums)What is this beat and why is it so popularWhat does Grt. and Sw. mean in this organ score?Practice advice: Struggling with alternating left hand and off beat right hand melodyIs this image the normal way to denote starting off the beat?What's the difference between pulse and beat?Score with snare on 3rd beat or on 2nd and 4th beats half speedAlternative or more advanced methods for counting rhythmsHow to clearly notate tuplets, both “simple” and “complex,” in irregular metersWhat are the numbers below the notes in this violin score?
How do I change the output voltage of the LM7805?
Does the Voyager team use a wrapper (Fortran(77?) to Python) to transmit current commands?
What is the resistivity of copper at 3 kelvin?
Do other countries guarantee freedoms that the United States does not have?
If there were no space agencies, could a person go to space?
Does bottle color affect mold growth?
What are good ways to improve as a writer other than writing courses?
Is TA-ing worth the opportunity cost?
Is this cheap "air conditioner" able to cool a room?
"How do you solve a problem like Maria?"
How quickly could a country build a tall concrete wall around a city?
Colleagues speaking another language and it impacts work
Non-OR journals which regularly publish OR research
Can we use other things than single-word verbs in our dialog tags?
Short story about a teenager who has his brain replaced with a microchip (Psychological Horror)
Purchased new computer from DELL with pre-installed Ubuntu. Won't boot. Should assume its an error from DELL?
Ampacity of Conductive Tape
Does the length of a password for Wi-Fi affect speed?
What is to be understood by the assertion 'Israels right to exist'?
Why should public servants be apolitical?
Does this put me at risk for identity theft?
Why couldn't soldiers sight their own weapons without officers' orders?
How does The Fools Guild make its money?
How can glass marbles naturally occur in a desert?
Is the beaming of this score following a vocal practice or it is just outdated and obscuring the beat?
Sources for sight-reading exercises that focus on subdivisions (emphasis on drums)What is this beat and why is it so popularWhat does Grt. and Sw. mean in this organ score?Practice advice: Struggling with alternating left hand and off beat right hand melodyIs this image the normal way to denote starting off the beat?What's the difference between pulse and beat?Score with snare on 3rd beat or on 2nd and 4th beats half speedAlternative or more advanced methods for counting rhythmsHow to clearly notate tuplets, both “simple” and “complex,” in irregular metersWhat are the numbers below the notes in this violin score?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
The source is c.1770...
- https://imslp.org/wiki/Scots_Songs_for_Voice_and_Harpsichord_(Bremner%2C_Robert)
...first book.
I can see that the beaming matches the words of the vocal part. But it obscures the beat.
In the second full bar, at the word 'wave' it's a grouping of 3 + 1 eighths. That looks like a triplet on beat 1 and the eighth for "the" on beat 2, but of course it really is 4 eighths in two beats.
Is this beaming normal for vocal parts?
I was trying to sight read from the book, but the rhythm was hard to read. At least for me.
If it's normal vocal practice, I should learn to read it.
If not, I could try to mark over the score in some way.
I really like these folk song settings so I want to figure out how to handle sight reading the score.
notation rhythm sight-reading
add a comment |
The source is c.1770...
- https://imslp.org/wiki/Scots_Songs_for_Voice_and_Harpsichord_(Bremner%2C_Robert)
...first book.
I can see that the beaming matches the words of the vocal part. But it obscures the beat.
In the second full bar, at the word 'wave' it's a grouping of 3 + 1 eighths. That looks like a triplet on beat 1 and the eighth for "the" on beat 2, but of course it really is 4 eighths in two beats.
Is this beaming normal for vocal parts?
I was trying to sight read from the book, but the rhythm was hard to read. At least for me.
If it's normal vocal practice, I should learn to read it.
If not, I could try to mark over the score in some way.
I really like these folk song settings so I want to figure out how to handle sight reading the score.
notation rhythm sight-reading
add a comment |
The source is c.1770...
- https://imslp.org/wiki/Scots_Songs_for_Voice_and_Harpsichord_(Bremner%2C_Robert)
...first book.
I can see that the beaming matches the words of the vocal part. But it obscures the beat.
In the second full bar, at the word 'wave' it's a grouping of 3 + 1 eighths. That looks like a triplet on beat 1 and the eighth for "the" on beat 2, but of course it really is 4 eighths in two beats.
Is this beaming normal for vocal parts?
I was trying to sight read from the book, but the rhythm was hard to read. At least for me.
If it's normal vocal practice, I should learn to read it.
If not, I could try to mark over the score in some way.
I really like these folk song settings so I want to figure out how to handle sight reading the score.
notation rhythm sight-reading
The source is c.1770...
- https://imslp.org/wiki/Scots_Songs_for_Voice_and_Harpsichord_(Bremner%2C_Robert)
...first book.
I can see that the beaming matches the words of the vocal part. But it obscures the beat.
In the second full bar, at the word 'wave' it's a grouping of 3 + 1 eighths. That looks like a triplet on beat 1 and the eighth for "the" on beat 2, but of course it really is 4 eighths in two beats.
Is this beaming normal for vocal parts?
I was trying to sight read from the book, but the rhythm was hard to read. At least for me.
If it's normal vocal practice, I should learn to read it.
If not, I could try to mark over the score in some way.
I really like these folk song settings so I want to figure out how to handle sight reading the score.
notation rhythm sight-reading
notation rhythm sight-reading
asked 8 hours ago
Michael CurtisMichael Curtis
17.3k12 silver badges58 bronze badges
17.3k12 silver badges58 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
It's normal practice for vocal music that went out of fashion in 20th century practice: syllable distribution is now pretty universally indicated by slurs. Among other things, this makes it more straightforward for instruments to double a singing voice. Another is that when syllable distributions differ between stanzas, you can indicate this with a broken slur but changing beaming in a similar manner is much more complicated.
And of course, like you observed, the relation to the beat is easier to see when the beaming follows the meter. All that being said: yes, you'd likely want to get used to this since older editions tended to follow that standard, and older editions often have the advantage of being out of copyright and thus much easier accessible. And urtexts (which some people prefer in new editions as well) follow the manuscript closely and thus would also reflect this practice in case it was in use at that time.
add a comment |
Your example was the standard notation for vocal parts up to about 1950. The beams indicate the notes sung to one syllable of the lyrics. You will find almost all "pre-computer-engraving" vocal scores written that way.
The slurs in your example show exactly the same thing as the beaming, and were sometimes omitted, except over quarter notes or longer which don't have beams.
For long passages (i.e. more than one bar) sung to a single syllable, the beaming followed the normal non-vocal convention, and a slur indicated the extent of the syllable.
In modern notation the beaming follows the same rules as for non-vocal music, and slurs are used to show groups of notes sung to one syllable.
When all music was printed from metal plates engraved by hand, it was no more time-consuming to produce this style of beams. Computer notation software has more or less killed it in favour of beaming all parts the same way, since the old style vocal beaming can't easily be automated.
Singers seem to be divided about which convention is "best" - some find the modern beaming convention hard to read because it hides the rhythmic connection between the words and the music, others (like you) find the old-style rhythms hard to decipher.
Incidentally your example shows another common feature of editions from that period, namely that long notes tend to appear in the middle of their sounding duration, not at the start as in modern music engraving. See the half notes in the first and last bars of the bass line, for example.
New contributor
Your timeframe doesn't quite add up, though. You say this style went out-of-favor around 1950, and you also attribute the style change to computer notation software, which wasn't commonplace until the 1980s. Might there be another explanation for the style change?
– Peter
6 hours ago
@Peter -- maybe the style went out of favor later; there was probably a transitional period. Publishing houses were using computer systems long before PCs were commonplace. This paper says that "the 1970s saw phototypesetting and computer-based technology almost completely take over all forms of publishing...." Or maybe there were other factors, as you suggest.
– David Bowling
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "240"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f87558%2fis-the-beaming-of-this-score-following-a-vocal-practice-or-it-is-just-outdated-a%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
It's normal practice for vocal music that went out of fashion in 20th century practice: syllable distribution is now pretty universally indicated by slurs. Among other things, this makes it more straightforward for instruments to double a singing voice. Another is that when syllable distributions differ between stanzas, you can indicate this with a broken slur but changing beaming in a similar manner is much more complicated.
And of course, like you observed, the relation to the beat is easier to see when the beaming follows the meter. All that being said: yes, you'd likely want to get used to this since older editions tended to follow that standard, and older editions often have the advantage of being out of copyright and thus much easier accessible. And urtexts (which some people prefer in new editions as well) follow the manuscript closely and thus would also reflect this practice in case it was in use at that time.
add a comment |
It's normal practice for vocal music that went out of fashion in 20th century practice: syllable distribution is now pretty universally indicated by slurs. Among other things, this makes it more straightforward for instruments to double a singing voice. Another is that when syllable distributions differ between stanzas, you can indicate this with a broken slur but changing beaming in a similar manner is much more complicated.
And of course, like you observed, the relation to the beat is easier to see when the beaming follows the meter. All that being said: yes, you'd likely want to get used to this since older editions tended to follow that standard, and older editions often have the advantage of being out of copyright and thus much easier accessible. And urtexts (which some people prefer in new editions as well) follow the manuscript closely and thus would also reflect this practice in case it was in use at that time.
add a comment |
It's normal practice for vocal music that went out of fashion in 20th century practice: syllable distribution is now pretty universally indicated by slurs. Among other things, this makes it more straightforward for instruments to double a singing voice. Another is that when syllable distributions differ between stanzas, you can indicate this with a broken slur but changing beaming in a similar manner is much more complicated.
And of course, like you observed, the relation to the beat is easier to see when the beaming follows the meter. All that being said: yes, you'd likely want to get used to this since older editions tended to follow that standard, and older editions often have the advantage of being out of copyright and thus much easier accessible. And urtexts (which some people prefer in new editions as well) follow the manuscript closely and thus would also reflect this practice in case it was in use at that time.
It's normal practice for vocal music that went out of fashion in 20th century practice: syllable distribution is now pretty universally indicated by slurs. Among other things, this makes it more straightforward for instruments to double a singing voice. Another is that when syllable distributions differ between stanzas, you can indicate this with a broken slur but changing beaming in a similar manner is much more complicated.
And of course, like you observed, the relation to the beat is easier to see when the beaming follows the meter. All that being said: yes, you'd likely want to get used to this since older editions tended to follow that standard, and older editions often have the advantage of being out of copyright and thus much easier accessible. And urtexts (which some people prefer in new editions as well) follow the manuscript closely and thus would also reflect this practice in case it was in use at that time.
answered 7 hours ago
user62426
add a comment |
add a comment |
Your example was the standard notation for vocal parts up to about 1950. The beams indicate the notes sung to one syllable of the lyrics. You will find almost all "pre-computer-engraving" vocal scores written that way.
The slurs in your example show exactly the same thing as the beaming, and were sometimes omitted, except over quarter notes or longer which don't have beams.
For long passages (i.e. more than one bar) sung to a single syllable, the beaming followed the normal non-vocal convention, and a slur indicated the extent of the syllable.
In modern notation the beaming follows the same rules as for non-vocal music, and slurs are used to show groups of notes sung to one syllable.
When all music was printed from metal plates engraved by hand, it was no more time-consuming to produce this style of beams. Computer notation software has more or less killed it in favour of beaming all parts the same way, since the old style vocal beaming can't easily be automated.
Singers seem to be divided about which convention is "best" - some find the modern beaming convention hard to read because it hides the rhythmic connection between the words and the music, others (like you) find the old-style rhythms hard to decipher.
Incidentally your example shows another common feature of editions from that period, namely that long notes tend to appear in the middle of their sounding duration, not at the start as in modern music engraving. See the half notes in the first and last bars of the bass line, for example.
New contributor
Your timeframe doesn't quite add up, though. You say this style went out-of-favor around 1950, and you also attribute the style change to computer notation software, which wasn't commonplace until the 1980s. Might there be another explanation for the style change?
– Peter
6 hours ago
@Peter -- maybe the style went out of favor later; there was probably a transitional period. Publishing houses were using computer systems long before PCs were commonplace. This paper says that "the 1970s saw phototypesetting and computer-based technology almost completely take over all forms of publishing...." Or maybe there were other factors, as you suggest.
– David Bowling
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Your example was the standard notation for vocal parts up to about 1950. The beams indicate the notes sung to one syllable of the lyrics. You will find almost all "pre-computer-engraving" vocal scores written that way.
The slurs in your example show exactly the same thing as the beaming, and were sometimes omitted, except over quarter notes or longer which don't have beams.
For long passages (i.e. more than one bar) sung to a single syllable, the beaming followed the normal non-vocal convention, and a slur indicated the extent of the syllable.
In modern notation the beaming follows the same rules as for non-vocal music, and slurs are used to show groups of notes sung to one syllable.
When all music was printed from metal plates engraved by hand, it was no more time-consuming to produce this style of beams. Computer notation software has more or less killed it in favour of beaming all parts the same way, since the old style vocal beaming can't easily be automated.
Singers seem to be divided about which convention is "best" - some find the modern beaming convention hard to read because it hides the rhythmic connection between the words and the music, others (like you) find the old-style rhythms hard to decipher.
Incidentally your example shows another common feature of editions from that period, namely that long notes tend to appear in the middle of their sounding duration, not at the start as in modern music engraving. See the half notes in the first and last bars of the bass line, for example.
New contributor
Your timeframe doesn't quite add up, though. You say this style went out-of-favor around 1950, and you also attribute the style change to computer notation software, which wasn't commonplace until the 1980s. Might there be another explanation for the style change?
– Peter
6 hours ago
@Peter -- maybe the style went out of favor later; there was probably a transitional period. Publishing houses were using computer systems long before PCs were commonplace. This paper says that "the 1970s saw phototypesetting and computer-based technology almost completely take over all forms of publishing...." Or maybe there were other factors, as you suggest.
– David Bowling
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Your example was the standard notation for vocal parts up to about 1950. The beams indicate the notes sung to one syllable of the lyrics. You will find almost all "pre-computer-engraving" vocal scores written that way.
The slurs in your example show exactly the same thing as the beaming, and were sometimes omitted, except over quarter notes or longer which don't have beams.
For long passages (i.e. more than one bar) sung to a single syllable, the beaming followed the normal non-vocal convention, and a slur indicated the extent of the syllable.
In modern notation the beaming follows the same rules as for non-vocal music, and slurs are used to show groups of notes sung to one syllable.
When all music was printed from metal plates engraved by hand, it was no more time-consuming to produce this style of beams. Computer notation software has more or less killed it in favour of beaming all parts the same way, since the old style vocal beaming can't easily be automated.
Singers seem to be divided about which convention is "best" - some find the modern beaming convention hard to read because it hides the rhythmic connection between the words and the music, others (like you) find the old-style rhythms hard to decipher.
Incidentally your example shows another common feature of editions from that period, namely that long notes tend to appear in the middle of their sounding duration, not at the start as in modern music engraving. See the half notes in the first and last bars of the bass line, for example.
New contributor
Your example was the standard notation for vocal parts up to about 1950. The beams indicate the notes sung to one syllable of the lyrics. You will find almost all "pre-computer-engraving" vocal scores written that way.
The slurs in your example show exactly the same thing as the beaming, and were sometimes omitted, except over quarter notes or longer which don't have beams.
For long passages (i.e. more than one bar) sung to a single syllable, the beaming followed the normal non-vocal convention, and a slur indicated the extent of the syllable.
In modern notation the beaming follows the same rules as for non-vocal music, and slurs are used to show groups of notes sung to one syllable.
When all music was printed from metal plates engraved by hand, it was no more time-consuming to produce this style of beams. Computer notation software has more or less killed it in favour of beaming all parts the same way, since the old style vocal beaming can't easily be automated.
Singers seem to be divided about which convention is "best" - some find the modern beaming convention hard to read because it hides the rhythmic connection between the words and the music, others (like you) find the old-style rhythms hard to decipher.
Incidentally your example shows another common feature of editions from that period, namely that long notes tend to appear in the middle of their sounding duration, not at the start as in modern music engraving. See the half notes in the first and last bars of the bass line, for example.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 7 hours ago
guestguest
311 bronze badge
311 bronze badge
New contributor
New contributor
Your timeframe doesn't quite add up, though. You say this style went out-of-favor around 1950, and you also attribute the style change to computer notation software, which wasn't commonplace until the 1980s. Might there be another explanation for the style change?
– Peter
6 hours ago
@Peter -- maybe the style went out of favor later; there was probably a transitional period. Publishing houses were using computer systems long before PCs were commonplace. This paper says that "the 1970s saw phototypesetting and computer-based technology almost completely take over all forms of publishing...." Or maybe there were other factors, as you suggest.
– David Bowling
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Your timeframe doesn't quite add up, though. You say this style went out-of-favor around 1950, and you also attribute the style change to computer notation software, which wasn't commonplace until the 1980s. Might there be another explanation for the style change?
– Peter
6 hours ago
@Peter -- maybe the style went out of favor later; there was probably a transitional period. Publishing houses were using computer systems long before PCs were commonplace. This paper says that "the 1970s saw phototypesetting and computer-based technology almost completely take over all forms of publishing...." Or maybe there were other factors, as you suggest.
– David Bowling
2 hours ago
Your timeframe doesn't quite add up, though. You say this style went out-of-favor around 1950, and you also attribute the style change to computer notation software, which wasn't commonplace until the 1980s. Might there be another explanation for the style change?
– Peter
6 hours ago
Your timeframe doesn't quite add up, though. You say this style went out-of-favor around 1950, and you also attribute the style change to computer notation software, which wasn't commonplace until the 1980s. Might there be another explanation for the style change?
– Peter
6 hours ago
@Peter -- maybe the style went out of favor later; there was probably a transitional period. Publishing houses were using computer systems long before PCs were commonplace. This paper says that "the 1970s saw phototypesetting and computer-based technology almost completely take over all forms of publishing...." Or maybe there were other factors, as you suggest.
– David Bowling
2 hours ago
@Peter -- maybe the style went out of favor later; there was probably a transitional period. Publishing houses were using computer systems long before PCs were commonplace. This paper says that "the 1970s saw phototypesetting and computer-based technology almost completely take over all forms of publishing...." Or maybe there were other factors, as you suggest.
– David Bowling
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Music: Practice & Theory Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f87558%2fis-the-beaming-of-this-score-following-a-vocal-practice-or-it-is-just-outdated-a%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown