Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Bug in Audit Accidentals? (Read 11082 times) previous topic - next topic

Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Hi, I finally registered too!
I'm having a problem with the audit accidentals feature. When you have put an accidental on a note, it seems to be acting like a key change (affecting notes in all octaves) rather than just changing the notes on that one line.
As a result, it is deleting the accidental symbols from the other notes in the bar. Is it correct to do this (I'm not gifted with be a trained musician, but my wife gives me stick when I ask her to play the printed scores!).
If an example would help, it makes a hideous mess of the bass part in Bach's Air. The notes should be D D' C#' C# but it insists on removing the # from the second C#. (And yes I know it should be in D, but I was making an example!!)
Has anyone else found this - I didn't spot it whilst reading through the faqs / previous problems.

}B->

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #1 –
>The notes should be D D' C#' C# but it
There is a convention that accidentals cover all octaves. Most people will put one in as a reminder though. Audit accidentals will take them out, though. It would be nice to have an option allowing for them to stay.

Two options:
1) don't use audit accidentals anymore, or
2) Use the text feature to add (#) in front of the note.

Regards,

Andrew

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #2 –
Sorry to disagree Andrew, but the rule is that accidentals only affect subsequent notes in the bar AT THE SAME PITCH. Quite specifically they do NOT affect notes at the octave.

Coincidentally I had written to Noteworthy only a few days ago on this very subject. How come it has only just surfaced? And in several places at once!

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #3 –
Hmm. Okay, maybe I first saw the octave thingy with Noteworthy, and came to take it as gospel. Just goes to show you can't believe everything on the net that you read. :-)
I guess its only just surfacing now is just a cosmic thing, and of no other significance ;-)

- A

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #4 –
I checked up with a friendly conductor who confirmed that my initial impression about accidentals was accurate (at least that's what he'd been going by for many years)
My problem isn't so much when inputting the music from the PC keyboard, but more when I import a midi file and print out the score.

cheers,

jools }B->

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #5 –
NWC does apply acccidentals in all octaves of a note in a measure. This is not strictly the proper way to interpret the accidentals, but it is the way NWC works at the moment. For now, it is best to add accidentals to all notes in differing octaves after the first in a measure that is not in key. This ,ight help the player as well, in cases where it might be confusing without them.

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #6 –
As mentioned, Noteworthy applies accidentals to other octaves. This is somewhat unexpected but not totally unreasonable. However, when ties are combined with accidentals, unreasonable things happen.

To fix ideas, try entering the following into Noteworthy in the key of C:

C D E E-flat(tied) barline E D C E

Then do a force-accidentals, then you see that the initial E of the second bar bears an E natural, but a subsequent audit accidentals erases it. This creates a stuck note.

If you enter all the same notes first, and introduce the barline later, than a greyed flat appears in front of the second note of the tie, and applies to the second E  in the second measure, which should not happen.

So in each case we see that Noteworthy lacks the concept of an accidental that only applies to the initial note carried over from the previous bar.  In some cases it ignores the tie from the previous bar altogether; in others it makes it an ordinary accidental applying to all notes in the measure.

As a simple temporary countermeasure, Noteworthy should have a feature called "force extra accidentals", which means force an accidental on any note which had an accidental applied to it in the previous bar. This is useful to live performers even when Noteworthy correctly handles the accidentals.  It would also notify composers when an explicit accidental is required to override Noteworthy's default behaviour (which might change when it handles accidentals in a more standard manner).

A related, perhaps simpler, change, would be to have "force extra accidentals" to be a mode rather than a global action. In other words, in this mode, adding a note would force an accidental if there was an accidental applied to that note in the previous bar.

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #7 –
B, do you know a web page where the accidentals rules are completely explained ? I knew the traditional rule that an ordinary accidental applies to all notes in the measure, and also that a tied note keeps its accidental, but I didn't know that other notes in the second measure of the tied note shouldn't inherit the accidental.

Indeed, in all such contentious cases, I have always seen
a reminder of the accidental, or in contrary a natural sign, so that there is no doubt on what to sing or play. But if there exists a standard rule, I would like to know it.

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #8 –
Check out The Essential Dictionary of Music Notation by Tom Gerou & Linda Lusk, © MCMXCVI by Alfred Publishing Co., Inc.

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #9 –
Is this book worth the price to pay it (and to import it from whatever country it is published) ? Since I live in France, I probably can't find it in a library, and have to order it before I can leaf through it.

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #10 –
The cost is US$5.95, well worth the price.
The cost to import it from the USA could be a problem, I don't know.  I have no idea what it's like to live in France.  :P
The ISBN is 0-88284-730-9, just in case you need it.
Alfred Publishing Co., Inc.
P.O. Box 10003
Van Nuys, CA  91410-0003
www.alfredpub.com

There was a handbook I had used in college - a library copy.
I think it was by [abbr=Forgive me if I got the name wrong.  It's been 25 years.]Clinton Roemer[/abbr], and might have been called [abbr=again, 25 years...]The Copyist's Handbook[/abbr].  That may be worth looking into as well.

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #11 –
Olivier notes, and I quote:
[begin quote]
Indeed, in all such contentious cases, I have always seen a reminder of the accidental, or in contrary a natural sign, so that there is no doubt on what to sing or play.
[end quote]

Indeed, the heart of my suggestion is that Noteworthy supply explicit accidentals in such cases.

In my posting, I noted that in the case of an accidental tied from the previous bar, the pitch of subsequent notes in the bar is unclear, and that Noteworthy does not follow the accepted rule.  I simply suggest that Noteworthy follow the standard practise (noted by Olivier) of affixing accidentals to subsequent notes in the bar.  Even when there is no tie, emphasizing that the bar line has cancelled an accidental from the previous bar is useful to performers.  This is independent of whether Noteworthy is changed to conform to a more standard interpretation of accidentals.

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #12 –
The Essential Dictionary of Music Notation by Tom Gerou & Linda Lusk, © MCMXCVI by Alfred Publishing Co., Inc.

This book was mentioned earlier in this thread.  I just ordered it for $4.95 on bn.com.  (Someone there pointed out that the 2000 edition is better than the 1996 edition.  The newer one is spiral bound and stays open without holding it.)  It's also $1 cheaper.

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #13 –
I was always under the impression the accidental carried to all notes of the same nominal value regardless of octave; I don't know if that's true or not, but it's what I think I was taught. Regardless, many charts show the second flat.  The problem for the musician is that when the copyist uses unconventional notation, it's confusing to play.

If NWC were to put in an option to add a forced accidental for the remaining notes, it would be good to see it in parentheses, and it should occur only the first time each variation on the altered nominal note occurs.  For instance, assuming you're in the key of C major, but playing Bb eighth notes in two four note groups, one leger line above the treble clef, one at the middle line, one below middle C and one again at middle line, then the entire group a second time, I'd hope to see:

First B (above the clef) with a flat sign
Second B with a flat sign with brackets (b)
Third B with a flat sign with brackets (b)
Fourth B with no sign even though it's flatted
Fifth to eighth B's with no signs even thought they're flatted.

Does this make sense, or would it confuse the person playing the part?

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #14 –
David, and others:

Writing from the perspective of an amateur choir singer, I must point out that any notation, conventional or not, is confusing! I convert the music to MIDI, play it until it is memorized, then pretend to read it while singing.

Do other musicians do that same?

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #15 –
Accidentals only apply to to the line or space on which they are written (The AB Guide to Music Theory P14)

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #16 –
Oh ! I was willing to buy "the Essential Dictionary of Music Notation". Does "the AB Guide to Music Theory P14" conflicts with the previous one? Which book shall I buy?

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #17 –
The rules of notation in general are created for the convenience of live performers. In particular, the modern standard rules for accidentals are designed to limit the scope of accidentals, and simplify the task of determining if an earlier accidental is still in effect or not.  Accidentals are temporary. They only last the current bar.  Ties create a conflict, and that conflict is  resolved by maintaining the tie and bending the accidental rule slightly.  But remember a tie doesn't require the performer to play a note, but only maintain what he's already playing.

Consider how live performers function.  If a performer sees a note without an accidental, then there are two simple cases:

1. If the note occurred with an accidental earlier in the same bar, that note will be in the performers mind (along with its fingering on wind instruments), and he will use that note.

2. If no accidental was applied to the same note earlier in the current bar, than he performs the note according to the key signature.  The performer does not and cannot examine previous bars to make this determination.  In general, the previous bar may be on a different line or a different page of the score. Similarly, the performer (especially keyboard performers with a wide range of octaves on the score) has no time to look high and low for accidentals on earlier notes in other octaves that might apply to the current note.

Nevertheless, many performers find that the barline-cancelling rule takes time to sink in.  In other words, if an accidental was last used 4 bars ago, it's largely forgotten.  But in the previous bar, it's still in the performer's auditory memory.  In such cases, performers prefer to have accidentals explicitly cancelled even when not strictly necessary.  This eliminates the need to scan back even as far as the previous barline to see if an accidental is still in effect or not.

Inserting such accidentals could be called "Audit Extra Accidentals".  As noted in earlier posts, insertion of such accidentals is, in fact, customary in standard published music. The need for such a feature is simply made more acute by Noteworthy's nonstandard handling of accidentals.

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #18 –
"The Essential Dictionary of Music Notation" does not conflict with "The AB Guide to Music Theory."  The former agrees that accidentals apply to only the line or space on which they are written.  A note one (or more) octave(s) higher or lower than a previous one does need to have its own accidental.
Reply 17 by B Balden pretty much covers the rest well.

...play it until it is memorized, then pretend to read it while singing.  Do other musicians do that same?
I suspect that there are quite a lot of amateur singers out there who do something similar, but very few musicians do that.

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #19 –
Didn't Beethoven pretend to hear the orchestra while conducting?

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #20 –
I take issue with Mack's comment:

"I suspect that there are quite a lot of amateur singers out there who do something similar, but very few musicians do that."

Seems like a very elitist remark.  Even though I can't carry a tune in a wet paper bag, I believe vocalists are musicians, and musicians need not be professional.

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #21 –
Many thanks to B Balden (reply 17), and also to Mack Maiden.

Though, I agree with David Palmquist that Mack's comment seems very elitist. Moreover, I suspect that some professional sight-readers are less musicians than some amateur singers

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #22 –
Please forgive my choice of words.  I did not mean to imply (nor did I realize that I did until after reading all of these replies) that singers are not musicians.  My wife is a musician who happens to be a singer.  She reads very well, though many of her choir members use the printed music simply as a lyric sheet.
Once again, I apologize for creating an environment in which others may misinterpret my meaning.

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #23 –
No offense taken here! My reason for buying NWC in the first place was to create rehearsal music for myself. Positively beats the band (pun intended) for that purpose.

Re: Bug in Audit Accidentals?

Reply #24 –
Don't forget that there is not a clearcut distinction amongst choir members between those of us who can sightread, and those who have to hear the music then memorise. For myself it depends on the difficulty of the music - particularly the rhythm. If the music is straightforward I can sightread easily, if its a bit more complicated I can read it and sing it correctly once I've sung it a couple of times with the choir. But there are some pieces where there is no alternative for me, but to put the alto part into NWC, listen carefully, repeatedly, and eventually I may be able to sing it correctly!!