Skipping a section of music

Topic: Skipping a section of music (Read 3489 times) previous topic - next topic

Skipping a section of music

2013-10-23 12:13 pm

My choir is rehearsing Borodin's Polovtsian Dances and I am using Richard Woodroffe's version (http://nwc-scriptorium.org/db/classical/b/boropold.nwc). However we are not singing all 629 bars! (That's a lot of notes Richard.)

I don't want actually to remove the cut sections, just skip over them, so I added on each stave:
at bar 233 a special ending (D) and the text 'cut to 369'
at bar 369 a special ending (1)
at bar 433 a special ending (D) and the text 'cut to 571'
at bar 571 a special ending (1)

The second cut works fine but in the first, play resumes at bar 321. If I add:
at bar 321 a special ending (D)
that cures the problem; play now resumes as required at 369 but what was going wrong at bar 321 initially and is there a better way to do this?

The working version is attached.

Re: Skipping a section of music

Reply #1 – 2013-10-23 12:21 pm

The culprit is the double bar line between 320 and 321... It terminates the special ending.

Re: Skipping a section of music

Reply #2 – 2013-10-23 05:32 pm

Thanks. I was unaware that a double bar line had anything other than a visual effect. Is that documented?

Re: Skipping a section of music

Reply #3 – 2013-10-23 06:15 pm

Quote from: Brian Maskell – 2013-10-23 05:32 pm

I was unaware that a double bar line had anything other than a visual effect. Is that documented?

Depends on how you define "documented":

Quote from: NoteWorthy Online – 2007-01-24 09:39 pm

Double bar lines are basically treated as special ending termination points.

Re: Skipping a section of music

Reply #4 – 2013-10-24 07:04 pm

Quote

Quote from: NoteWorthy Online on 24-01-2007, 13:39:53
Double bar lines are basically treated as special ending termination points.

Isn't that a flaw? I'm sure I've seen double bars within first, second and third endings more than once.

Re: Skipping a section of music

Reply #5 – 2013-10-25 01:48 am

Quote from: David Palmquist – 2013-10-24 07:04 pm

Isn't that a flaw? I'm sure I've seen double bars within first, second and third endings more than once.

I recall a discussion on this topic some years ago. The result was that no change was made. (Actually, I just did a search and there were quite a few discussions that touched on this - search on "special ending double bar" without the quotes)

FWIW a double bar is a section break of some kind though the at least one argument did look at the use of a double bar when there was a key signature change (IIRC) and that this could legitimately occur within a special ending... Alfred's indicates that the double bar for a key change is optional.