'Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer to note heads?'

Messages in this thread

Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer to ... - James, 27 Mar 09:20PM
     Re: Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer... - Ronald Pearl, 27 Mar 11:45PM
         Re: Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer... - James, 28 Mar 01:11AM
             Re: Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer... - Ronald Pearl, 28 Mar 02:06PM
                 Re: Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer... - Stephen Wrigley, 28 Mar 09:27PM
                     Re: Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer... - James, 29 Mar 03:11PM

Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer to note heads?
Posted by James - 27 Mar 09:20PM
Which should be closer to the note heads: fingering numbers or the wavy arpeggio sign?

I vote fingering as in my attachment but I'm curious as to the opinions of others.

--
Mac OS 10.9 Mavericks
Sibelius 6.2
Attachment engraving.png (11K)
Back to top | All threads
 
Re: Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer to note heads?
Posted by Ronald Pearl - 27 Mar 11:45PM
I'd vote for the opposite: the arpeggio sign, like an articulation, is a musical directive - the passage should sound a certain way; fingering is a convenience to help the performer execute the passage. For me the hierarchy is the musical idea first, the notation to aid the execution second. That said, fingering is a hard thing to do well - especially for a polyphony instrument like a guitar: so many notes, one staff, and not a lot of room.

My two cents - I'm sure others might feel differently.

--
Ron Pearl
7.1.2
iMac, 10.7.5, 2.5 GHz i5, 4G ram
http://www.ronaldmpearl.com/
Back to top | All threads
 
Re: Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer to note heads?
Posted by James - 28 Mar 01:11AM
In Elaine Gould's book, Behind Bars, on page 377 there is an example at the top of the page that seems to support my view. It has fingering closer than the wavy arpeggio sign but it also has an intervening bracket. That makes me more confident in my view. Her book is the gold standard.

On the other hand, the one issue that I disagree with her is on the same page. She says to use dotted slurs for guitar ligado and solid slurs for phrasing. I think it should be just the opposite because using slurs for phrasing in guitar music is relatively rare, while indicating ligado is extremely common.

Ron, your idea about the arpeggio sign being more primary in the musical hierarchy is very logical. But so far I'm leaning the other way. It just seems to look better.

Anyone else have any thoughts?

--
Mac OS 10.9 Mavericks
Sibelius 6.2
Back to top | All threads
 
Re: Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer to note heads?
Posted by Ronald Pearl - 28 Mar 02:06PM
James,

Guitar music is always a problem (harmonics, anyone?). I think you have to go with what is best, and what seems the clearest to you. My point is simply the music first, fingering second. That said, if you do have the arp. line first, then you really have to have the fingerings to the right of the chord, and depending on spacing this might be a problem. Then there is the right hand; and dynamics; in short, too much information on one staff. And, there will always be exceptions.

In your example, I'd put the 1 and the 0 to the right of the C and G; then place 4 above the high E. Still not perfect, though, I'd agree.

This is why engraving is sill an art - no matter how good the rules are for a program such as Sibelius, a good eye will, or shoud - triumph in the end.

Best of luck with this!

--
Ron Pearl
7.1.2
iMac, 10.7.5, 2.5 GHz i5, 4G ram
http://www.ronaldmpearl.com/
Back to top | All threads
 
Re: Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer to note heads?
Posted by Stephen Wrigley - 28 Mar 09:27PM
Gould mentions putting the fingering above the note on p.275, which might be a better place for the G and E. By extension (as it's in an "upward" voice) you could maybe put the 1 under the C. The example on p.377 you mention has a lorra lorra information squeezed in, doesn't it?!
Back to top | All threads
 
Re: Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer to note heads?
Posted by James - 29 Mar 03:11PM
Hi Stephen,

I'm pretty sure you meant page 375, not 275. Yes, fingering can go above, below, and perhaps sometimes even to the right of the note head. I certainly take advantage of this when I can. But I try to be consistent for a run of notes. That is, I avoid one note with a finger number above, the next with a number below, the next with a number in front, etc.

The example on page 377 doesn't seem too full of information, other than it being just the nature of guitar notation in general to shove a lot onto a single staff. I do think vertical brackets are extraneous and I don't use them. I also don't use "C" in front of roman numerals for barres, just the roman numeral itself, and the "½" when needed.

Thank you for your thoughts.

--
Mac OS 10.9 Mavericks
Sibelius 6.2
Back to top | All threads
 

Quick reply

To add a reply to the end of this thread, type it below, then click Reply.

(.sib, .png and .jpg only)

Messages in this thread

Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer to ... - James, 27 Mar 09:20PM
     Re: Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer... - Ronald Pearl, 27 Mar 11:45PM
         Re: Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer... - James, 28 Mar 01:11AM
             Re: Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer... - Ronald Pearl, 28 Mar 02:06PM
                 Re: Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer... - Stephen Wrigley, 28 Mar 09:27PM
                     Re: Sib. 6.x: fingering or arpeggio sign closer... - James, 29 Mar 03:11PM