Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Q: repear bar inside a measure? (Read 10782 times) previous topic - next topic

Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Is it possible to put a repeat bar inside a measure and not messes up the measure counting.

For example
in 4/4 AAAAA | AAAA | BBBB | A |: BB :| C |
where A B and C are quarter note, | is bar line and |: is repeat section. In this example there should be a total of 4 measures not 5......

Is this a bug?

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #1 –
Any bar line with notes to the left is considered a valid measure, and as such, will increment the measure count.

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #2 –
So this is a bug then.
The problem is that in some cases you don't want the repeat sign become a bar line. For example in the case when you have to repeat and it is not at the end of a full measure. Noteworthy will count that as seperate measure, not correct.

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #3 –
This goes against the conventions for copying music. Any partial bars are difficult to read, and just asking for trouble. Besides, it's quicker to finish the bar properly and then use the expected repeat then to learn how to use the fudge factor.

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #4 –
The example above (I'll repeat it here to save you scrolling around)
4/4 AAAAA | AAAA | BBBB | A |: BB :| C |
would be very difficult to read and I wonder why you would bother setting it to 4/4! Is this some new way of scripting music?
I can't see why it's not 6 uneven measures.
If you want to bar it up that way, why not make it plain with time sigs of 5/4 4/4 4/4 1/4 2/4 and 1/4?

Andrew

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #5 –
Maybe I didn't make myself clear, the example that I have used is just an example to demonstrate the problem/limitation of the software which is counting measure incorrectly.
If you are interested in a "real" example, take "Bourree" from the Water Music as an example:
A | A A A A | etc etc | A (dotted half) :||: A | A A A A |
A A A A | etc etc | B (dotted half note) :|
The software count the measure | A (dotted half :||: A| as 2 seperate measures, which is incorrect. There is noting wrong to do this "partial measure", and it is very common.

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #6 –
I think I see what Herbert is talking about. When starting
with an anacrucious (sp?) with a repeat back to the
beginning he ends up with partial bars.

I think this issue is usually dealt with as follows:

A |: AAAA | etc etc | AAA A :|

in other words, the first note is repeated as the last note
in the last bar of the repeat section. You may need to use
first and second time bars to connect to the next section.
The result is that only the very first and very last bars
are incomplete. Noteworthy will certainly allow this and I
think it's more likely to be acceptable to readers.
Personally, I think I'd have a lot of trouble with a repeat
in the middle of a bar!

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #7 –
Well John, your suggestion would work if the "pickup" note is the same for the 2nd section. It is not a good way to deal with the problem though and I have seen a lot of music that has a repear bar in the middle of the measure. So it is not at all uncommon.

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #8 –
What is common is not necessarily normal.
Putting a repeat in the middle of a measure is never a good thing (even if engravers do so to save pages), for when you're reading music you prefer to concentrate on the music itself, not the syntax... I once saw a book that used so much ||: :||and |: :| imbricated that you had to think much before starting to read... Music should never be a labyrinth (maze) [unless in the "harmonic labyrinth" of J.S.Bach].
Just a musician thought.

NWCly yours,
MAD

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #9 –
I appreciate the difficulty of trying to reproduce a score exactly but...
The first law of music copying is to keep it simple.
If you can avoid multiple repeats, segnos etc. particularly nested - it makes it easier for the performer.
When copying I use coloured highlighters to mark repeats, signs and codas each a different colour.
You dont want to waste studio time because someone misreads the part on every second take.
Bill Russo wrote the perfect axiom in his book - Composing for the Jazz Orchestra.

If want something played well, keep it simple - anything slightly difficult may not be played at all!

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #10 –
Herbert,

>your suggestion would work if the "pickup" note is the same
>for the 2nd section

That's what I meant about maybe needing a first and
second time bar. The last beat of the first time bar
contains the duplicated anacrucious note, the last beat
of the second time bar is the first note of the second
phrase. Over the 30 years or so that I've been reading
music I cannot recall ever having seen a repeat in the
middle of a bar, so it can't be *that* common! I've often
seen the structure I described in my previous post.

Just a question - where is your opening repeat? Is it
assumed to be the beginning?

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #11 –
Haha, I can't say that I have 30 years of experience in reading music, however, in my years of playing in chamber music, orhestral music, it is very common.

For example, when I open up a score of Handel's "Royal Fireworks" I can find quite a few examples (Movements: Bouree, La Rejouissance, etc etc). The same with "Water Music" (Movements: Bouree, Aria, Menuet etc etc) Plus many many more examples. If you have a few minuets, go to the local library and check out the above score, and you will see what I am talking about.

To answer your question,opening repeat is assumed in the beginning.

Enjoyed!

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #12 –
I just tried entering the notes as written above, and NWC played it back exactly the way I would have played it if I saw it written. Maybe my copy of NWC is broken :-)
Adam

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #13 –
Well, the problem that is in dicsussion is not the correctness of playing the music back but rather the measure number being count incorrectly.

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #14 –
I see what you mean. What do you do if you compress rests, or don't you have more than 1 bars rest in your music? I use rehearsal letters, rather than bar numbers. It makes rehearsal of NWC scores so much easier.
Adam

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #15 –
Well, using rehearsal letters is good idea, but having correct measure number is also necessary.

I am not sure if I understand what do you mean by "compress rests".....

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #16 –
It's just a method that I (and I'm sure many others) use when there is more than 1 bars rest. I seperate the part to a seperate score, and if there is more than 1 bars rest, I just leave it as a 1 bar rest, and use the text tool to write how many bars rest it should be. Makes things easier to read for musicians.
Adam

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #17 –
Yeah, this compressed rest idea is good, wonder how come it is not a feature in noteworthy, maybe somone can submit it to the wish list. :)

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #18 –
I am crossing my fingers hoping that NWC have compressed rests in the next, or at least, some future release. I have used other notation software that groups multi-measure rests when pulling out individual parts. If NWC adds this, I think many users will find it to be a great feature!!

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #19 –
Heh! I'll quartet that motion for that feature.

Re: Q: repear bar inside a measure?

Reply #20 –
Why do you want to limit this to rests only ? Never play bass guitar ? Sometimes you have 32 times the same measure (rap), and it's rather useful in that case too... I agree that a correct numbering would be great !
But Chris, uncross your fingers, it ain't easy to use the kbd ;^)

MAD