Just wondering, but when creating horn parts, is it common to create a horn 1/2 + horn 3/4 part, or should there be 4 separate parts, one for each horn?
So it would be a good practise to create separate parts? And what about the woodwinds and the rest of the brass? I always created dual parts for clients, but read recently the workflow of an arranger who always creates separate parts.
I always write separate parts, for the reasons Laurence has stated. Two to a part is OK for saving vertical space in the full score, but messy for part reading, especially when both instruments are on leger lines, tho' it is widely done in string and brass band divisis. If it has to be done, parts should be dovetailed. This is why traditionally the 3rd horn has a higher part than 2nd. Unfortunately, I don't think Sib has a facility yet for splitting dual parts dynamically.
There is a plugin called Explode staff to parts, that can do this. I was already planing to use it, but wasn't sure if this is common practise. Makes sense though, that players would love it.
If you have put two parts on one stave in the score, it's a nuisance to create two seperate parts. Which, I suspect, is the main reason dual parts are often inflicted on players.
It's good practice to have 4 parts. As pointed out above, The "order", technically, is 1 3 2 4. I don't do it that way but I'm doing pops charts and it doesn't really matter. I have 2 staves in the score, 1/2 and 3/4. When I make parts I typically use Filter/Notes in Chord (for Deletion) and delete the unwanted part. "Explode" can sometimes put rests in where the "other" part was, and it's more of a hassle to delete the rests.
Be careful with solo and unison passages though. If you want completely seamless Part preparation, it's best to have four staves in the score. Or to think the other way round - write four staves, then create composite parts for display in the Full Score if you need to save space.
> This is why traditionally the 3rd horn has a higher part than 2nd.
Adrian, could you elaborate on this? The traditional horn order is one of the few conventions that I never could find a reasonable explanation for, so I'd really like to get in into the secret. I tried the thought experiment of how things would change if the order was "normal", but I fail to see a significant difference.
See attached file, Alex. Horns 3 & 4 are dovetailed with 1 & 2. 3rd part is higher than 2nd. It's just the way it has always been done. Plenty of examples in Piston Orchestration.
Alexander, here is an explanation on why horns are divided that way. This is from an orchestration book:
The practice of using horns in pairs, dating back to the earliest Classical scores, led to a practical, unique expedient not common with the other wind instruments. This developed the need for specialisation of playing in either high or low registers. Accordingly, horn players have justifiably concentrated on developing an embouchure adaptable to either medium- to-high or medium-to-low range spreads. This operating practice has resulted in horns being interlocked and written as follows: high, I—III; low, II-IV. The voice parts for four horns are therefore not written in the numerical order as they appear on the score page.
I've always assumed that the reason for this is that, when horn numbers increased from 2 to 4 from the classical to romantic periods, then horns 3 & 4 were in effect a second 'pair' of horns, making 3 a 'first' player and 4 a 'second' player. Initially, when 4 (natural) horns were used, often the 2nd pair were in a different key to horns 1 and 2 (eg in much of Berlioz) to expand the number of notes available to the composer. So it's good practice to think of horns 1 and 3 as 'high' players and 2 and 4 as 'low'.
BTW OT This does not really apply to the concert band, where horn positions are generally decided on skill level (2 being a 'better' player than 3), but I still find it hard not to stick to orchestral practice when writing for band!
--
Philip Sparke - Anglo Music Press
Sib 7.0.2 Windows 7, 3.04GHz i7-2600K 16GB RAM 256GB SSD
www.philipsparke.com
There's some confusion in this thread with the term 'part', which is used here both to designate the notes played by a single instrument ('two parts on one staff') and the music sheet itself containing all the notes played by one or more single instruments.
It's common practice to have, say, Horn 1 & 2 combined in one part, but always on separate staves. In the Full Score horns can be notated all on one staff or dove-tailed on two staves, one called Horn 1&2 and the other Horn 3&4.
FWIW: three note chords, for example C-E-G, are split as follows: C for Horn 4, E for Horn 2, G for Horn 1&3.
I like Philip's reasoning for horn numbering, tho' Holst had a different plan writing for 6 horns in 3 parts. 1 & 2 on the top note, 3 & 4 in the middle, 5 & 6 at the bottom. [See attached pages from Piston]. Strauss stuck to numbering his high horns 1,3,5,7 and low horns 2,4,6,8 tho' I don't understand why he didn't dovetail horns 1 thru' 4. [PNG attached].
Dovetailing.sib
Piston.PNG.png