Is the beaming of this score following a vocal practice or it is just outdated and obscuring the beat?Sources for sight-reading exercises that focus on subdivisions (emphasis on drums)What is this beat and why is it so popularWhat does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Is the beaming of this score following a vocal practice or it is just outdated and obscuring the beat?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;








3















enter image description here



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.










share|improve this question






























    3















    enter image description here



    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.










    share|improve this question


























      3












      3








      3








      enter image description here



      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.










      share|improve this question














      enter image description here



      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






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked 8 hours ago









      Michael CurtisMichael Curtis

      17.3k12 silver badges58 bronze badges




      17.3k12 silver badges58 bronze badges























          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4














          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.






          share|improve this answer
































            3














            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.






            share|improve this answer








            New contributor



            guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.





















            • 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 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
            );



            );













            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            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









            4














            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.






            share|improve this answer





























              4














              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.






              share|improve this answer



























                4












                4








                4







                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.






                share|improve this answer













                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.







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered 7 hours ago







                user62426

































                    3














                    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.






                    share|improve this answer








                    New contributor



                    guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                    Check out our Code of Conduct.





















                    • 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















                    3














                    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.






                    share|improve this answer








                    New contributor



                    guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                    Check out our Code of Conduct.





















                    • 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













                    3












                    3








                    3







                    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.






                    share|improve this answer








                    New contributor



                    guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                    Check out our Code of Conduct.









                    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.







                    share|improve this answer








                    New contributor



                    guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                    Check out our Code of Conduct.








                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer






                    New contributor



                    guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                    Check out our Code of Conduct.








                    answered 7 hours ago









                    guestguest

                    311 bronze badge




                    311 bronze badge




                    New contributor



                    guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                    Check out our Code of Conduct.




                    New contributor




                    guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                    Check out our Code of Conduct.

















                    • 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











                    • @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

















                    draft saved

                    draft discarded
















































                    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.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    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





















































                    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







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

                    Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

                    Ласкавець круглолистий Зміст Опис | Поширення | Галерея | Примітки | Посилання | Навігаційне меню58171138361-22960890446Bupleurum rotundifoliumEuro+Med PlantbasePlants of the World Online — Kew ScienceGermplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN)Ласкавецькн. VI : Літери Ком — Левиправивши або дописавши її