With reference to the attachment (screenshot below) I would like to ask please:
I have used BOXED (system) TEXT for the instructions 'OPEN REPEAT' and 'AD LIB ENDING'. Personally, I think they look fine, but I wondered, please, what other members thought?
Also, as you can see, the text is written in capitals - which again I feel looks OK. By default, Sibelius places this text in capitals.
Thanks very much indeed for any kind assistance offered here.
Best,
Paul David Seaman (UK)
Fender Rhodes Suitcase / Fender Rhodes Stage / Mini Moog Model D / Multi Moog / Hohner E7 Clavinet / Yamaha DX7 (Mk1) & DX21 / Roland Juno 6 / Roland XV5050 (module).
Looks fine to me, Paul, bold and eye catching. Yes, small caps is the style of Sib's InkPen font. Quite normal and clear in jazz charts. Why do you have doubts? But I would definitely prefer to see a start repeat in the coda.
Thanks for the compliments Adrian; I was not expecting that! Ha ha.
Yes, it seems within keeping of the Modern Jazz genre/format.
Correct, I used small-capitals (as large looked too dominating).
I ask for the simple reason that - although I have gradually incremented my way up from Sib-First - I really am still a 'novice'. I have written (I suppose to my credit) literally 100's of charts for: cabarets/shows/function-bands etc over the years, albeit by 'hand'. I just don't feel confident (to be pretty honest) to begin producing s/w arrangements until I am more familiar (and faster!!!). I am currently spending circa an hour per day working on Sib.
Yes, you are absolutely right. I have made this change already. This was actually discussed last night (with Laurence) - but I am using the same screen-shot as in the previous thread (hence the 'coda/repeat' is absent in the PNG).
I think you are being far too fussy, Paul. The way you have presented it in your score is fine and perfectly understandable. Italics are not necessary, especially in a jazz chart. "ad lib" is short for "ad libitum" and simply means "at one's pleasure, or in this case, I would presume "at the director's decision".
Ha ha, well that could be because I am an obsessive-Virgo!
Well actually, I always got the impression that those (copyists) who produce s/w music are very anal about all of the dimensions/sizes and everything else that goes into producing a chart/score. I mean, most people on here seem to know about everything and so I gather that they have a firm understanding of what each and every parameter does, and where/why to use it.
In other words, in their eyes (and I state this with no harsh feelings), they would be of the opinion that I am doing many things incorrectly (which is fair enough because I probably am!) - hence, I intend to post threads periodically as I go along (now that I am [finally] at the stage where I am 'writing' in some full-scores).
btw (just in case you are curious) - they are all jazz transcriptions of (pieces from) entire albums by the likes of Miles, Corea, Hancock, Weather Report, etc. So, I transcribed the 'heads' ('tune' sections) and then added appropriate (and accurate) 'solo sections' to each.
As you will obviously know, with 'Jazz', it is sometimes challenging to express what is being played by the Artist onto 'paper'. For example, "Bitches Brew" (Miles [1969]) stretches the limitations of what you can express 'on-paper' and so you have to (kind of) boil-it-down-to-the-essentials. Otherwise, the result will be something which is unplayable/nonsensical, or else an arrangement which is over 100 x pages long!
> Definitely. However, sometimes we have to be precise about indicating exactly what kind of freedom we mean.
Chris,
Yes, music is, after all, just a set of 'instructions' (for the player/conductor); and so the more accurate your instructions are, the greater the likely-hood the piece is going to be performed correctly.
> Rather than "ad lib" as a written instruction, I have seen "freak out".
Adrian,
Maybe that would suit a Heavy Band's piece of music? The term is the kind of thing the band members are likely to say verbally. At the end of the day, as long as everyone understand the instruction, then I suppose it's fine to use it. But - I am sure you would agree - it is not a universally preferred (musical) term.
> Is there an irony to having a discussion about how to exactly write an instruction that essentially means 'express freely' ?
Hi Dave,
You are possibly correct in 'literary' terms.
But - without wishing to sound pompous - I think 'freedom' comes out of 'discipline' and 'order'. I mean, you need to establish something very clearly and without ambiguity before you can expect others to adhere/interpret a set of instructions.
I think a common misconception about Jazz (and I was - bizarrely enough! - thinking of this myself for no reason only a couple of days ago) is that it is something you 'cant write down' (i.e. notate). I believe it can be notated, however, at the end of the day the quality of the performance is governed by the level of musicianship of the player. In this particular case, how well the 'improvised' ending is executed is a result of how well the band performs together as a unit.
Anyway, such discussions are slightly outside of the scope of this particular thread.
Just an off-topic comment: I think this forum is very good in the sense that people do not converse in puerile text-speak, and also there appears to be a deliberate absence of the (dreaded) 'smiley' icon button!
On many other forums, I have found myself at a loss as to trying to understand what people are saying/advising!