Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: fermata default placement - not a big issue, but... (Read 9927 times) previous topic - next topic

fermata default placement - not a big issue, but...

At the moment we get by default:
Justification: left
Alignment: Best fit.
!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.5,Single)
|Clef|Type:Treble
|TempoVariance|Style:Fermata|Pause:0|Pos:6
|Rest|Dur:4th
|TempoVariance|Style:Fermata|Pause:0|Pos:8
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0|Opts:Stem=Down
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End

But since the fermata is almost always related to a note or to a rest, the result is that it is almost always misplaced by default,
and its placement needs almost always to be manually corrected. The default should then be:

Justification: center
Alignment: At next note

!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.5,Single)
|Clef|Type:Treble
|TempoVariance|Style:Fermata|Pause:0|Pos:6|Justify:Center|Placement:AtNextNote
|Rest|Dur:4th
|TempoVariance|Style:Fermata|Pause:0|Pos:8|Justify:Center|Placement:AtNextNote
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0|Opts:Stem=Down
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End

Re: fermata default placement - not a big issue, but...

Reply #1 –
Use the 'Fast Insert: Fermata' toolbar button. It defaults properly.

Changing the default for 'Tempo Variance' would make it wrong for most of the options.
'Breath Mark' and Caesura are rarely centered.
NWC keeps track of one set of defaults per object.
All the various styles for an object share the same set of placement defaults.
Registered user since 1996

Re: fermata default placement - not a big issue, but...

Reply #2 –
So I'll  sugggest two separate menus, one for signs and one for verbal expressions. But perhaps it will be simpler to remove all the verbal expressions from the menu, as they can always be entered as text, which is something  one often neeeds to do anyway, as many of those are not part of this menu.
 
Just like the fermata, caesura and breath mark will look better on the page when aligned at next note/bar - and centered so once the verbal expressions will be out of the way the default placement could be corrected now without creating a new problem.    

In any case it would be a good idea if NWC could allow the user to create his own templates and allow him to change default definitons according to his personal needs. One should be able to add missing expressions and remove the ones he usually does not use for example. Not such a revolutionary idea, which could solve this problem and many others at the same time.  

By the way the "tempo variance" headline has very little to do with its content, in fact it's wrong from an academical point of view. "Agogics" or "speed flexibility" or "time bend" etc. could be more appropriate and more self explaining.

Re: fermata default placement - not a big issue, but...

Reply #3 –
Quote from: LEON –
Just like the fermata, caesura and breath mark will look better on the page when aligned at next note/bar
I disagree. Breath marks need to align across staves so they usually look better 'Best Fit' than 'At Next Note/Bar'. But neither are as good as StaffSymbol Text, Right, At Next Note/Bar with proper spacing:
Code: (nwc) [Select · Download]
!NoteWorthyComposer(2.5)
|AddStaff
|StaffProperties|EndingBar:Open (hidden)
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|TempoVariance|Style:Breath Mark|Pause:0|Pos:8|Placement:AtNextNote
|Chord|Dur:4th|Pos:0,1
|TempoVariance|Style:Breath Mark|Pause:0|Pos:8
|Chord|Dur:4th|Pos:0,1
|Text|Text:"I  "|Font:StaffSymbols|Pos:8|Justify:Right|Placement:AtNextNote
|Chord|Dur:4th|Pos:0,1
|Bar
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|TempoVariance|Style:Breath Mark|Pause:0|Pos:8|Placement:AtNextNote
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:b0
|TempoVariance|Style:Breath Mark|Pause:0|Pos:8
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:b0
|Text|Text:"I  __"|Font:StaffSymbols|Pos:8|Justify:Right|Placement:AtNextNote
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:b0
|Bar|SysBreak:Y
|AddStaff
|StaffProperties|EndingBar:Open (hidden)
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:-3
|TempoVariance|Style:Breath Mark|Pause:0|Pos:8|Placement:AtNextNote
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:-3
|TempoVariance|Style:Breath Mark|Pause:0|Pos:8
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:-3
|Text|Text:"I  "|Font:StaffSymbols|Pos:8|Justify:Right|Placement:AtNextNote
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:-3
|Bar
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:-3
|TempoVariance|Style:Breath Mark|Pause:0|Pos:8|Placement:AtNextNote
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:-3
|TempoVariance|Style:Breath Mark|Pause:0|Pos:8
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:-3
|Text|Text:"I  __"|Font:StaffSymbols|Pos:8|Justify:Right|Placement:AtNextNote
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:-3
|Bar
!NoteWorthyComposer-End
 0.324	 rg_ZenTxt v1.0
Since NWC introduced the StaffSymbols option, I no longer use the TempoVariance object to display breath marks.
Registered user since 1996

Re: fermata default placement - not a big issue, but...

Reply #4 –
Quote from: LEON –
... caesura and breath mark will look better on the page when aligned at next note/bar ...
I disagree. That would be very unusual.

Quote
- By the way the "tempo variance" headline has very little to do with its content, in fact it's wrong from an academical point of view. "Agogics" or "speed flexibility" or "time bend" etc. could be more appropriate and more self explaining.
To me, "tempo variance" is self explanatory.  I suspect I'm not the only NWC user who has never heard of "agogics."  I think "speed flexibility" and "time bend" imply rubato rather than accel. or rit., etc.  It ain't broke, no sense trying to fix it.

Re: fermata default placement - not a big issue, but...

Reply #5 –
Caesuras and breath marks are usually aligned also when defined as center-at next note/bar, and they are so rarely used that it's no problem manually changing their placement once in a while. Fermatas on the other hand are much more common so one needs to adjust them time after time, and that's bothersome. You may disagree with this and it's ok, we don't need to agreee about preferences. This is why there should be the option to change the default settings of everything in the program. I would be glad to hear your views on this subject too, I noticed it went unanswered.

Fermatas breath marks and caesuras are not tempo variances, they are islands outside the tempo. When you do a fermata, etc. you forget about tempo for a moment, you do not think of a new varied tempo. Rall. and acc. and the likes are more near to the definition of "tempo variance" as you are still counting at a gradually varying pace, but it takes more than an occasional ten. on one note to create a tempo variance. Like it takes more than an occasional accidental to create a modulation.
"Agogics" is the correct term, and if people don't know it the'll learn it like they learn everything else. Tempo variance is an invention of NWC, and if it's more immediate it's hardly accurate. And since as I hear NWC is widely used in educational programs here you have an additional reason why changing the current state of things.  

Re: fermata default placement - not a big issue, but...

Reply #6 –
G'day Leon,
Quote from: LEON –
<snip>
Fermatas breath marks and caesuras are not tempo variances, they are islands outside the tempo. When you do a fermata, etc. you forget about tempo for a moment, you do not think of a new varied tempo. Rall. and acc. and the likes are more near to the definition of "tempo variance" as you are still counting at a gradually varying pace, but it takes more than an occasional ten. on one note to create a tempo variance. Like it takes more than an occasional accidental to create a modulation.
FWIW I guess it depends on context...  Within the context of NWC, these items are considered tempo variances - personally I think this is a logically correct position as the tempo is varied temporarily for these objects - I.E. there is a noticeable break or pause of some kind, whether it be silence or a held note.

Of course we don't have to agree about the above.  I do concur that the best default for a fermata is centred at next note/bar and as Rick has noted, when the toolbar icon is used to place a fermata, these are the properties it gets.

For breath marks and caesura I prefer the best fit alignment (I'm too lazy to go to the effort of creating them as text objects as recommended by Rick).
I plays 'Bones, crumpets, coronets, floosgals, youfonymums 'n tubies.
 

Re: fermata default placement - not a big issue, but...

Reply #7 –
Quote from: Lawrie Pardy –
Within the context of NWC, these items are considered tempo variances - personally I think this is a logically correct position as the tempo is varied temporarily for these objects -

In the practical sense yes, not in the conceptual one. The concept of tempo is not necessarily associated with the alteration of a steady beat flow or the duration of a particular time value. If we are in an Allegro movement the advent of a fermata or a rall. does not change or vary the tempo. It temporarily prolongs a number of notes, but it does not affect the perception of the initial tempo as such. Agogical playing - which includes rall. ten. etc. - does not alter tempo by definition. At times you may even do a rall and acc. wthin one beat and arrive exactly in time to the next beat... Therefore the lavish use of the term Tempo is misleading especially in the educational context, I fear we are following the machine in this.

Re: fermata default placement - not a big issue, but...

Reply #8 –
Leon, I think you're being overly academic here. A fermata, breath mark, or other pause may not be a variation in the overall tempo of a piece, but it is certainly a variation in the tempo of the bar in which it is present. And the term "agogic" is unnecessarily obscure. It's not even in common use in academia, or wasn't when I took my MA in theory 45 years ago. We knew what the term meant (it's been in use since the late 19th century), and we were guilty of using it in papers when we wanted to sound learned, but I don't recall ever hearing it in conversation among my fellow grad students in music.

Out of curiosity, I looked up agogic in two musical reference books from that era (I still use them regularly). One, Westrup and Harrison's New College Encyclopedia of Music (Norton, 1960) doesn't even include the term. The other, Willi Apel's Harvard Dictionary of Music (Harvard University Press, 1964 - the arbiter of musical terminology for many, many years and through many, many editions), after defining the term and giving examples of it (rallentando and accelerando, tempo rubato, fermatas, breath marks ["breathing signs"], and even rests) concludes with this interesting sentence: "The term was introduced by H. Riemann (Musikalische Dynamik un Agogik, 1884) particularly in order to describe those deviations from strict tempo and rhythm which are necessary for an intelligible rendering of the musical phrase." I think "deviation" and "variation" are close enough in meaning to give Apel's seal of approval to Eric's use of the term for pause indicators in NWC. You, of course, are free to disagree. But there are probably more important things for us to talk about.

Re: fermata default placement - not a big issue, but...

Reply #9 –
Hi William,

I find it difficult to understand why one should prefer to use an incorrect terminology because it's more familiar and reject a more accurate one because it's unfamiliar. Besides, the preference of the term agogics or a similar one is not the main issue (and I hope you did not mean to call me a snob here): it was just a solution I suggested instead of the incorrect use of the term "tempo variance" in the context in which it appears.
Quote from: William Ashworth –
A fermata, breath mark, or other pause may not be a variation in the overall tempo of a piece, but it is certainly a variation in the tempo of the bar in which it is present.
I disagree, tempo goes beyond the local, an occasional lingering is not an alteration of tempo. If I'd go by your logics I'd call an auxiliary chord as "a modulation in  the bar in which it's present". Like it takes more than an occasional accidental to create a modulation it takes more than an occasional rall. to depart from the original tempo. Formally speaking, tempo expressions appear above the pentagram while rall. acc. (agogics, eh?) usually appear underneath it, and in italics. So there is a difference after all.    
The terms "Strict tempo" and "tempo" are not so closely related as you pictured them: "strict tempo" relates exclusively to a specific way to treat counting while "Tempo" is an abstract and much wider concept that describes the feel/mood of a piece/section. They are two different things even though the word tempo is present in both.
So while it's ok to describe a fermata as a "deviance from strict tempo" in no serious book a fermata will ever be called a "tempo variance (or tempo deviation)". Sorry, it's not the same thing, not even close.  

My impression is that outside NWC nobody uses the term "tempo variance", and even if one does my guess is that it won't be in relation to the items included in the "tempo variance" menu, but to something else such as meno mosso, piu' mosso and the likes, which coincidentally are completely ignored by the tempo variance menu.
  

Re: fermata default placement - not a big issue, but...

Reply #11 –
Quote from: William Ashworth –


It sounds as if you did not take part in the debate yourself.
But it's ok, there are indeed more important things to do, I agree. No hard feelings.